STATE  LIBRARY. 


EXCHANGE 


" 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA, 


AS  AMENDED  BY  THE  FOURTEENTH  GENERAL  ASSEMBLY, 


FORMS  AND  DECISIONS, 


USE  AND  GOVERNMENT  OF  SCHOOL  OFFICERS. 


REVISED  AND  CODIFIED  IN  COMPLIANCE  WITH  LAW, 

BY 

ALONZO    ABEKNETHY, 

SUPERINTENDENT    OF    PUBLIC    INSTRUCTION. 


DES  MOINE8: 

G.   W.   EDWARDS,  STATE  PRINTER. 

1872. 


PREFACE 


Our  present  system  of  school  laws  was  adopted  in  1862.  Amend- 
ments have  been  enacted  at  each  subsequent  session  of  the  Gene- 
ral Assembly,  but  the  changes  made  by  the  last,  greatly  exceed 
those  of  any  previous  session  in  number  and  importance,  and 
the  labor  of  revising  and  codifying  is  thereby  largely  increased. 
The  original  law  has  been  modified  until  its  simplicity  and  harmony 
is  somewhat  impaired.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  laws  are  so  often 
framed  for  the  relief  of  local  difficulties,  with  little  regard  to  their 
general  effect;  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  time  may  soon 
come  when  it  will  be  desirable  to  have  the  whole  thoroughly  revised 
and  simplified  by  a  competent  commission. 

This  code  has  been  carefully  prepared ;  the  recent  laws  incorpo- 
rated in  their  proper  places,  the  obsolete  portions  omitted,  and  the 
whole  made  as  compact  and  connected  as  possible.  The  original 
language  has  been  retained,  except  where  changes  were  rendered 
necessary  by  subsequent  enactments.  As  some  changes  in  the 
arrangement  of  sections  were  necessary,  it  was  thought  best  to  adopt 
the  plan  recommended  by  the  code  commissioners  in  their  recent 
report  to  the  General  Assembly. 

For  the  convenience  of  those  who  may  desire  to  trace  the  history 
of  any  section  through  its  amendments  to  the  original,  a  tabular 
statement,  showing  when  the  several  sections  now  in  force  were  en- 
acted or  amended,  will  be  found  immediately  following  the  preface. 

The  notes  and  decisions  have  again  been  carefully  revised, 
and  additions  made,  so  as  to  explain  the  later  enactments,  and 
include  the  more  important  principles  recently  enunciated  in  de- 
cisions from  this  Department,  and  from  the  Supreme  Court. 

The  principal  changes  made  by  the  last  General  Assembly  were  : 
authorizing  sub-directors  to  administer  the  official  oath  to  each  other, 
on  or  before  the  third  Monday  following  their  election:  limiting  the 
amount  that  may  be  levied  for  teachers'  fund  in  a  township  to  fif- 
teen dollars  per  scholar;  and  for  contingent  fund  to  five  dollars  per 
scholar  in  any  one  year:  requiring  independent  districts  to  publish, 
two  weeks  before  the  annual  nceeting,  statements  of  receipts  and 
expenditures,  also  estimates  for  ensuing  year:  prohibiting  appro- 
priations of  public  money  to  institutions  or  schools  under  sectarian 
control :  authorizing  the  formation  of  independent  districts  from  the 
sub-districts  of  a  township,  upon  vote  of  the  electors:  providing 
for  the  annual  election  of  a  president  and  treasurer  in  independent 


289*51 


iv  PREFACE. 

districts,  the  president  to  be  a  member  of  the  board;  providing  also 
that  independent  districts  having  a  population  of  less  than  five  hun- 
dred, shall  have  but  three  directors:  prohibiting  changes  in  text- 
books in  the  schools  oftener  than  once  in  three  years:  changing 
the  time  of  the  sub-district  meeting  to  the  first  Monday  in  March, 
and  of  the  district  township  meeting  to  the  second  Monday:  requi- 
ring district  secretaries  and  county  superintendents  to  furnish 
information  concerning  deaf  and  dumb  children:  preventing  such 
changes  in  the  boundaries  of  civil  townships  as  will  divide  sub- 
districts,  except  when  made  on  congressional  township  lines: 
providing  for  restoring  territory  which  has  been  set  into  adjoining 
townships  or  counties  for  school  purposes:  changing  the  manner  of 
voting  and  levying  taxes  for  school  purposes,  by  providing  that  each 
district  township  and  independent  district  shall  vote  the  specific 
amounts  necessary  for  the  several  funds,  and  requiring  boards  of 
supervisors  to  determine  and  levy  the  per  centum  necessary  to  raise 
these  amounts:  providing  that  teachers'  certificates  shall  not  be 
revoked  until  an  opportunity  for  a  hearing  has  been  granted, 

A  sufficient  number  of  copies  of  the  school  laws  will  be  sent  to 
county  superintendents  to  supply  each  school  officer  with  one  copy; 
which  is  public  property  and  must  be  delivered  to  his  successor  in 
office. 

Some  of  the  more  important  decisions  in  appeal  cases  from  this 
Department  are  bound  with  a  limited  number  of  copies  of  the 
laws  for  the  official  use  of  county  superintendents  and  district  sec- 
retaries. 

Under  the  conviction  that  our  school  statutes  possess  an  im- 
portance, and  exert  an  influence,  both  vital  and  permanent,  upon 
the  future  of  our  commonwealth,  no  labor  has  been  spared  to  make 
this  volume  a  perfect  embodiment  of  the  school  laws  of  Iowa,  and 
it  is  sent  forth  in  the  hope  that  it  may  contribute  to  a  more  uniform 
and  enlightened  administration  of  the  laws,  and  promote  the  effi- 
ciency and  excellence  of  our  public  schools. 

ALONZO  ABERNETHY, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

DES  MOINES,  IOWA,  Ju'y,  1872. 


CONTENTS. 


TABULAR  STATEMENT— 

Showing  when  the  several  sections  of  the  school  laws  now  in  force  were 

enacted  or  amended vi 

CHAPTER  I. 

District  Townships 1 

District  Township  Meeting 3 

Sub-District  Meeting 4 

Board  of  Directors 7 

President 17 

Secretary 18 

Treasurer 21 

Sub-Director 23 

Board  of  (supervisors 25 

County  Auditor 27 

County  Treasurer 28 

Teachers 28 

County  Superintendent 30 

General  Provisions » .  34 

Independent  Districts 42 

Bonds  and  Orders 48 

School-House  Sites 50 

Appeals 51 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction 58 

Board  of  Examiners 60 

CHAPTER    II. 

COUNTY  HIGH  SCHOOLS 62 

CHAPTER  III. 

STATE  UNIVERSITY 66 

BLANK  FORMS 71 

INDEX..  101 


TABULAR  STATEMENT. 


For  convenience  in  referring  fo  tlie  chapters  and  sections  of  the  original  law*,  from 
which  the  present  sclvool  code  is  compiled,  the  J 'allowing  table  is  subjoined : 


Present 
School  Laws 

ENACTED   OR   AMENDED. 

School  Law? 

of  ISIiS. 

1862. 

1864. 

1806. 

1868. 

1870. 

1872. 

Ch.     fcec.|Ch.     StclCh.     Sec.jOh.     bec.|Ch.     Sec  j(Jh.  8ec.jCii.     8ec.|01i.      i?ec. 

I          1-3 
I             4 
I              5 
I             6 
I              7 
I             8 
I        9-10 
I            11 
I            12 
13 
14 
15-16 
17 
18-22 
I           23 
I           24 
I           25 
I        26-7 
I           28 
I           29 
I           30 
I            31 
I        32-6 
I           37 
I      .      38 
I      39-40 
41-45 
46 
47-8 
49 
50-51 
I        52-3 
I            54 
I            55 
I            56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61-3 
64 

65-e 

69 
I        70-2 
I            73 

I            74 
I           75 
I            76 

172       1-3 
172          4 
172          5 
172          6 
172          7 
172          8 
172    9-10 
172        1« 
172        17 
172        18 
172        19 
172    20-1 
172        22 
172  23-27 
172        28 
172        29 

I          1-3 

4 
5 
ft 
7 
10 
11-12 
14 
15 
20 
21 
22-3 
24 
26-30 
31 
37 
37 

133          1 

143          2 
143          1 
143          2 

84           1 

84            1 

143          4 
143        13 
143        13 

183          1 



132          1 

143        15 

143        16 

125      1-2 
132          1 
132          1 

172        30 
172        31 
172        32 
172        34 
172  35-39 
172        56 
172        40 
172  41-42 
172  43-47 
172        11 
172    48-9 
172        50 
172    51-2 
17*    53-4 

143          5 
143        14 

16 
17 
25 
32 
51-5 
89 
56 
57-8 
60-4 
18 
65-6 
67 
68-9 
85-6 

102          1 

102          2 

*  *  '         '  i  

132          1 

4             1 

143          6 

132          1 
21            2 
122          1 

172        55 

172        57 
172        58 
172        58 
172  59-61 
172        64 
172    65-8 
172        69 
172    70-2 

88 
90 
92 
92 
70-2 
75 
76-9 
80 
81-3 

102          3 

29            1 
122          1 

143          7 

133          2 

31          1 

114          1 

i  .  . 

1172        73 
172        12 

102         4 

143          8 
143          3 

84 
39 

TABULAR  STATEMENT. 

Stitemcnt — Continued. 


Vll 


15 

II 


1862. 


1804. 


ENACTED   OR   AMENDED. 


1866, 


1870. 


1872. 


Ch.     Sec.)  Oh.     Sec.jCh.     Sec.  |  Oh.     Sec.  |  Oh.      «ec.|Ch.   Sec.|Ch.     Sec.|Ch.     Sec. 

I            77 
I        78-9 
I           80 
I            81 
I            82 
I            83 
I        84-5 
I           86 
I            87 
I            88 
I            89 
I            90 
I            91 
I            92 
I            93 
I            94 
I            95 
1            96 
I            97 
I            98 
I           99 
I          100 
I          101 
I          102 
I          103 
I          104 
I          105 
I          106 
I          107 
I          108 
I  109-114 
I  115-118 
I  119-122 
I  123-130 
I          131 
I          132 
I  133-137 
I  138-142 
II       1-17 
III     1-18 

172        13 
172  14-15 
172        74 
Laws  of 
Sec.  2119, 
Laws  of  | 
Laws  of 

181          1 

40 
41-2 
43 

I            44 
45 

8 
34-5 

Board  of 
Rev.  1860 
Board  of 
Board  of 

Educ'tion 

Educ'tion 
Educ'tion 

Decemb'r 

Decemb'r 
Decemb'r 

17,  1861. 

14,  1861. 
18,  1861. 

80          1 
57          1 

172        77 
172        78 

50 

38 

137          1 

172        79 
172        80 
172        81 
172        82 
172        83 
172        84 
172        85 
172        86 
172        87 
172        87 
172        88 
172        89 
172        89 
172        90 
172        91 

18 
87 
9 
49 
38 
109 
110 
111 
112 
112 
113 
114 
114 
115 
116 

143          9 
143        10 

28    1  &3 
28    2&  3 
28           2 

8        1 

8        3 

76          1 

143        11 

28           2 

57          1 

8        4 
8        5 

76          1 
133          3 

8        2 

46          1 

33          1 

iii 

73      1-6 

98        1-4 

118-121 

124    1-4 

Sections 

2133-40, 
52          5 
52          4 
52    7-11 
Boird  of 

Rev.  1860 

124-131 
98 
97 
100-104 
140-4 

162          2 



Laws  of 

Educ'tion 

Decemb'r 

20,  1861. 
116  1-17 

87  1-18 

SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA, 

CHAPTER   I. 


otice*  of 


DISTRICT    TOWNSHIPS. 

SECTION  1.     Each  civil  township  now,  or  hereafter  or- 
ganized in  this  state,  is  hereby  declared  a  school  district, 
lor  all  the  purposes  of  this  chapter,  and  each  sub-district, 
as  now  organized,  shall  continue  such,  subject  to  the  pro-  school  district. 
visions  hereinafter  made. 

SEO.  2.     When  a  new  civil  township  has  been  formed, 
the  township  trustees  shall  divide  the  same  into  sub-dis- 
tricts, if  deemed  necessary  ;  and  shall  post  written  notices,  in.  new  town- 
specifying  the  time  and  place  of  the  first  election  for  sub- 
directors,  in  the  manner  provided  for  the  election  of  sub-  election- 
directors  in  organized  district  townships. 

SEC.  3.  When  an  organized  district  township  has  been 
left  without  officers,  the  township  trustees  shall  give  such 
notice  for  a  special  election  of  sub-directors,  as  is  required 
of  the  sub-director  in  case  of  regular  sub-district  elections  ;  fleers,  how  *u 
and  the  persons  elected  shall  continue  in  office  until  the 
next  regular  sub-district  election  thereafter. 

SEC.  4.     When  changes  in   civil  township  boundaries  ^7n^  a  district 

-i  -,.   ,    .  &.  T  •         i     n  i     T    -i     i  •    j     18    divided,  as- 

are  made,  or  any  district  township  shall  be  divided  into  sets  and  liabm- 

J  ties   to   be    di- 

vided. 

SEC.  2.  If  the  trustees  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  divide  the 
township  into  sub-districts,  they  will  give  notice  for  the  meeting  at 
some  central  point,  for  the  election  of  three  sub-directors.  If,  how- 
ever, they  divide  the  township  into  sub-districts,  then  the  notice 
should  be  given  for  a  meeting  iu  each  sub-district  as  required  in  sec- 
tion  8.  See  also  section  10,  and  note  to  same. 

SEC.  3.  Under  the  various  provisions  ot  our  law,  a  district  town- 
ship will  rarely  be  left  without  officers.  In  case  it  should,  the  com- 
ments on  section  2  are  applicable  as  to  notice.  See  section  18, 
and  notes  to  same. 

SEC.  4.  (  a  )  The  object  of  this  section  is  to  prevent  the  necessity 
of  a  special  election,  and  any  inconvenience  that  might  arise  from 
sl 


LAWS   OF  IOWA. 


two  or  more  entire  townships  for  civil  purposes,  the  exist- 
ing board  of  directors  shall  continue  to  act  for  both  or  all 
of  the  new  districts,  or  parts  of  districts,  until  the  next 
regular  sub-district  election  thereafter,  at  which  time  the 
new  district  townships,  shall  organize  by  the  election  of 
sub-directors.  The  respective  boards  of  directors  shall, 
immediately  after  such  organization,  make  an  equitable 
division  of  the  then  existing  assets  and  liabilities,  between 
the  old  and  new  districts  ;  and  in  case  of  a  failure  to 
agree,  the  matter  may  be  decided  by  arbitrators  chosen 
by  the  parties  in  interest.  A  similar  division  shall  be 
made  in  case  of  the  formation,  or  changes  of  boundaries,  of 

the  division  of  civil  townships.  When  the  time  for  the  regular 
election  arrives,  (first  Monday  in  March),  the  sub-directors  should 
give  notice  in  the  portion  of  the  original  township  which  retains  the 
corporate  name,  for  the  election  of  their  successors,  as  required  in 
sect;on  8;  and  the  township  trustees  should  give  similar  notice,  as 
provided  in  section  two.  The  sub-district  meetings  in  the  new 
township  will  organize  by  the  appointment  of  a  chairman  and  sec- 
retary, as  provided  in  section  9.  The  secretary  should  be  particu- 
larly careful  to  make  a  correct  record  of  the  proceedings  of  this 
primary  meeting.  The  newly  elected  boards  of  directors  will  enter 
upon  1  heir  duties  on  the  third  Monday  in  March  following,  and  should 
then  proceed  to  divide  the  property.  Assets  include  all  property 
and  moneys  belonging  to  the  district;  liabilities,  all  debts  for  which 
the  district  in  its  corporate  capacity  is  liable.  In  determining  the 
assets,  school  property  should  be  estimated  at  its  present  cash  value. 
If  deemed  best,  the  old  district  may  be  permitted  to  retain  the  assets 
and  settle  the  liabilities ;  or  each  district  may  take  its  proportion  of 
the  assets,  and  assume  its  proportion  of  the  liabilities.  Any  equita- 
ble arrangement  that  will  be  mutually  satisfactory  to  the  parties  in 
interest,  will  be  in  accordance  with  the  intent  of  the  law.  Any 
agreement  that  is  entered  into  should  be  reduced  to  writing,  and  en- 
tered in  the  records  of  each  of  the  districts  interested. 

( &. )  If  money  is  received  by  one  which  belongs  to  another,  the 
rule  is  a  general  one,  that  the  law  implies  a  promise  on  the  part  of 
the  receiver,  to  pay  it  over.  Based  upon  this  implied  promise  an 
action  may  be  maintained  for  its  recovery.  And  this  rule  applies  to 
corporations  as  to  individuals.  The  District  Township  of  Norway  v. 
The  District  Township  of  Clear  Lake,  XI  Iowa,  507.  In  this  case,  the 
district-township  of  Clear  Lake  having  been  divided  so  as  to  form 
two  district  townships,  the  following  Spring  it  received  all  the  funds 
apportioned  by  the  clerk  of  the  board  of  supervisors,  and  Norway 
brought  suit  and  recovered  a  just  portion  of  the  same. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  3 

independent  districts  or  the  consolidation  or  other  changes 
in  the  boundaries  of  civil  townships. 

SEC.  5.     Every  school  district  which  is  now,  or  may  ?.a<rh.Jcho£L 

v  i         •        i  i  ill  district    a     DOCiy 

hereafter  be  organized,  is  hereby  made  a  body  corporate,  corporate, 

by  the  name  of  the  "  district  township  of ,  in 

the  county  of ,  in  the  state  of  Iowa,"  and  in  that 

name  may   hold  property,  become  a  party  to  suits  and 
contracts,  and  do  other  corporate  acts. 

DISTRICT    TOWNSHIP    MEETING. 

SEC.  6.     Each  district  township  shall  hold  an  fumual  ing  of  district 
meeting  on  the  second  Monday  in  March.  township. 

SEC.  7.     The  electors  of  the  district,  when  legally  as-  ^SLuown8 
sembled  at  such  meeting,  shall  have  the  following  pow-  ship  meeting. 
ers,  viz  : 

First — To  appoint  a  chairman  and  secretary,  in  the 
absence  of  the  regular  officers. 

Second — To  direct  the  sale  or  other  disposition  to  be 
made  of  any  school-house,  or  the  site  thereof,  and  of  such 
other  property,  personal  and  real,  as  may  belong  to  the 
district  ;  and  to  direct  the  manner  in  which  the  proceeds 
arising  therefrom  shall  be  applied  :  Provided,  That  the 
money*  so  obtained,  shall  be  used  for  the  benefit  of  the 
sub-district  in  which  such  school-house  site  or  other  prop- 
erty is  situated. 

Third — To  determine  what  additional  branches  shall 
be  taught  in  the  schools  of  the  district. 


SEC.  5.  The  corporate  name  designated  in  this  section  applies 
only  to  district  townships.  For  the  legal  title  of  independent  dis- 
tricts, see  section  108  The  corporate  powers  enumerated  in  the 
latter  part  of  this  section,  apply  equally  well  to  both  kinds  of  dis- 
tricts. In  suits,  contracts,  and  conveyances,  the  corporate  name 
should  be  strictly  observed. 

A  sub-district  is  not  a  corporation,  and  hence  can  neither  hold 
property  nor  perform  any  corporate  act. 

SEC.  6.  The  district  townships  are  authorized  to  hold  only  one 
meeting  in  each  year,  but  in  case  of  necessity,  this  one  can  be 
adjourned  over  to  another  day.  The  adjournment,  however,  must 
be  a  formal  one,  after  the  meeting  has  been  duly  organized.  A  mere 
postponement  would  not  be  legal.  There  is  no  provision  for  a 
special  meeting. 

SEC.  7.  (a)  Ten  days'  previous  notice  of  this  meeting  should 
be  given  by  the  district  township  secretary  (sec.  35) ;  or,  in  cer- 
tain cases  by  the  township  trustees  (sec.  3) ;  but  as  the  law  fixes 


4  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

Fourth — To  delegate  any  or  all  of  the  powers,  con- 
tained in  the  foregoing  specifications,  to  the  board  of  di- 
rectors. 

Fifth — To  vote  such  tax,  not  exceeding  ten  mills  on 
the  dollar  in  any  one  year,  on  the  taxable  property  of  the 
district  township,  as  the  meeting  shall  deem  sufficient  for 
the  purchase  of  grounds  and  the  construction  of  the  nec- 
essary school-houses  for  the  use  of  the  respective  sub- 
districts,  and  for  the  payment  of  any  debts  contracted  for 
the  erection  of  ^  school-houses,  and  for  procuring  district 
libraries  and  apparatus  for  the  schools. 

SUB-DISTRICT    MEETING. 

SEC.  8.     The  several  sub-districts  shall  annually,  on  the 

Annual    meet-  first  Monday  in  March,  hold  a  meeting  for  the  election  of 

tricts.f  8Ul>dl8~  sub  director,  five  days  notice  of  which  meeting  shall  be 

given  by  the  then  resident  sub-director;  or  if  there  is 

none,  by  the  district  secretary,  posting  a  written  notice  in 

three  public  places  therein,  and  such  notice  shall  state  the 

hour  of  meeting. 


the  day  of  the  meeting  of  the  electors  of  the  district  township,  and 
also  of  the  sub-district,  a  failure  to  give  a  tull  notice,  or  any  notice 
at  all,  though  a  violation  of  law,  will  not  invalidate  the  proceedings 
of  the  meeting,  if  one  be  held. 

The  president  of  the  board  of  directors  should  preside,  (sec.  32), 
and  the  secretary  of  the  board  act  as  secretary  of  this  meeting, 
(sec.  34). 

'}  he  electors  can  not  delegate  their  power  to  vote  a  tax. 

(b)  It  is  the  duty  of  the  district  township  meeting  to  vote  a  tax 
for  the   payment  of  any  judgment  rendered  against  the  district 
township,    (sec.  91.) 

(c)  To  be  valid,  taxes  must  be  voted  on  the  day  fixed  by  law. 
The  district  township  meeting  can  legally  exercise  only  such  powers 
as  are  specifically  enumerated  in  the  law,  or  such  as  are  necessary  to 
secure  the  exercise  of  those  granted. 

SEC.  8.    See  note  to  section  7. 

No  minor  or  non-resident  can  take  part  in  a  meeting  of  electors 
No  person  can  be  elected  to  anv  office  unless  he  is  a  legal  voter 
To  be  entitled  to  the  right  of  suffrage,  a  person  must  be  a  male  citi- 
zen of  the  United  States,  twenty-one  years  of  age,  a  resident  of  the 
state  six  months  next  preceding  the  election,  and  of  the  county  sixty 
days.  (Constitution,  art.  2,  sec.  1.)  The  election  must  be  by  ballot. 
(Constitution,  art,  2,  sec.  6.)  In  a  tie  vote  there  is  no  election.  The 
chairman  of  the  meeting  is  entitled  to  one  vote. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OP  IOWA.  5 

SEC.  9.     At  the  meeting  of  the  sub-district,  a  chairman  chairman   and 
and  secretary  shall  be  appointed,  who  shall  act  as  judges  pointed.7 
of  the  election,  and  give  a  certificate  of  election  to  the 
sub-director  elect. 

SEC.  10.     In  all  district  townships  comprising  but  one  Board  of  direc- 
sub-district,  the  board  of  directors  shall  consist  of  three  Jjr?hree "" 
sub-directors;  and  in  all  district  townships  comprising  but rectoria- 
two  sub-districts,  it  shall  consist  of  one  sub-director  chosen 
from  each  sub-district,  and  one  from  the  district  township 
at  large,  who  shall  in  both  cases  be  elected  in  the  manner 
provided  by  law  for  the  election  of  one  sub-director  for 
each  sub-district.     The  judges  of  the  respective  sub-dis- 
trict elections,  shall  canvass  the  votes  for  the  sub-director 
chosen  from  the  district  township  at  large,  and  shall  issue 
a  certificate  of  election  to  the  person  elected. 

SEC.  11.     The  electors  of  a  sub-district  may,  at  their 
regular  meeting  in   March,  determine   what   amount  is  amount 
required  fur  the  erection  of  a  school-house  in  said  sub-  houJepiirposes" 
district,  and  the  payment  of  debts  contracted  for  the  con- 
struction of  school-houses,  and  the  sub-director  shall  cer- 
tify the  same  to  the  next  regular  meeting  of  the  electors 
of  the  district  township  held  thereafter. 

SEC.  10.  (a)  The  board  of  directors  of  a  district  township  can 
never  consist  of  less  than  three  members.  The  sub-director  from 
the  district  at  large  should  be  voted  for  at  both  sub-district  meetings. 
To  avoid  confusion,  the  tickets  should  specify— -for  sub  director,  A  B  ; 
for  sub-director  at  large,  C  D. 

(b.)  Where  there  is  but  one  sub  district  in  a  district  township,  the 
sub  district  meeting  should  ba  held  at  some  central  point,  on  the 
first  Monday  in  March,  for  the  election  of  three  sub-directors ;  five 
days'  notice  of  which  should  be  given  by  the  district  secretary,  as 
directed  by  section  8  ;  and  another  meeting  will  be  held  on  the  sec- 
ond Monday  in  March,  as  provided  by  section  6 ;  the  powers  and 
duties  of  the  two  meetings  being  entirely  separate  and  distinct. 

SEC.  11.  (a.)  This  section  authorizes  the  electors  ot  a  sub-dis- 
trict to  determine  what  amount  they  desire  to  have  raised  for  the 
erection  of  a  school-house  in  their  sub-district,  which  amount  can- 
not be  diminished  by  the  electors  of  the  district  township,  nor  by 
the  board  of  directors.  (Sections  12  and  28).  In  case  the  sub-dis- 
trict takes  no  action  on  this  subject,  the  district  township  meeting, 
(section  7,  fifth  clause)  may  vote  a  tax  to  build  a  house  in  any  sub- 
district  ;  and  even  when  the  sub-district  has  taken  action  the  dis- 
trict township  meeting  may  vote  even  a  greater  amount  than  that 
asked  for  by  the  electors  of  the  sub-district.  See  notes  to  sections 
12  and  28. 


0  SCHOOL  IAWS   OF  IOWA. 

SEC.  12.     Should  the  electors  of  the  district  township 
Board  of  direc-  neglect  or  refuse  to  vote  said  amount  at  said  meeting,  or 
fof8 amount  *«£  a  sum  adequate  for  the  erection  of  said  house,  the  board 
(SstrictsJ7  SUhi  °f  directors  shall,  at  their  first  regular  meeting  thereafter, 
distric^town*  aPPor^on  the  same  among  the  several  sub-districts,  as  jus- 
ship  neglect  or  tice  and  equity  may  require,  taking  as  the  basis  of  said 
said  amount  °te  apportionment  the  respective  amounts  previously  levied 
npon  said  sub-districts  for  school-house  purposes :     Pro- 
vided, That  in  no  case  shall  the  rate  exceed  fifteen  mills 
on  the  dollar  on  the  property  of  any  sub-district.     Within 
ten  days  thereafter  the  secretary  shall  file  a  certified  state- 
ment of  the  same  with  the  board  of  supervisors,  showing 
the  amount  assessed  on  each  sub-district.     Said  amount 


Sec.  12  ( a. )  The  law,  solicitous  for  the  education  of  all  the 
youth  of  the  state,  is  so  framed  as  to  encourage  and  facilitate  the 
construction  of  school-houses ;  hence  whenever  the  electors  of  a 
sub-district  or  of  a  district  township  vote  affirmatively  on  the  school- 
house  question,  the  house  is  inevitable, — the  tax  must  be  levied, — 
and  the  whole  amount  asked  for  by  the  electors,  up  to  the  maxi- 
mum rate  of  taxation  allowed  by  law. 

(  b. )  Should  the  electors  of  the  district  township  neglect  or  re- 
fuse to  vote  any  amount  in  response  to  the  request  of  a  sub-district, 
or  should  they  vote  an  amount  inadequate  to  the  erection  of  a  suita- 
ble school-house,  then  it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  board  of  directors 
to  apportion  the  whole  amount  determined  by  the  sub-district  to  be 
necessary. 

( c. )  The  provisions  of  law  by  which  sub  districts  were  required 
to  bear  the  whole  expense  of  building  their  own  school-houses  in 
certain  cases,  was  repealed  by  chapter  183,  laws  of  1868.  Now  the 
whole  of  every  school-house  tax,  except  as  explained  in  division  b  of 
note  to  section  28  must  be  apportioned  among  the  sub-districts  of 
the  township. 

( d. )  Sections  12  and  28  both  require  that  school-house  tax  shall 
be  "  apportioned "  among  the  several  sub-districts  as  justice  and 
equity  require.  The  real  meaning  and  intent  of  this  language  is 
that  each  sub-district  shall  contribute  its  just  proportion  toward  the 
erection  of  every  new  school-house  built  in  the  district  township. 
This  may  appear  uu}ast  to  some,  but  it  is  so  in  appearance  more 
than  in  reality  ;  and  it  must  be  acquiesced  in  and  adhered  to,  in  or- 
der to  reap  the  full  advantages  of  our  township  district  system.  The 
school-house  tax  on  a  sub-district  which  has  borne  the  whole 
expense  in  the  erection  of  its  house  may  be  relatively  light,  yet  such 
a  sub-district  should  not  be  wholly  exempted  ;  for  in  a  few  years  it 
will  rebuild,  when  it  will  desire  and  can  command  the  assistance  of 
the  rest  of  the  district  township. 


SCHOOL  LiWS  OF  IOWA. 


shall  be  levied  in  accordance  with  said  statement,  and  col- 
lected and  expended  for  the  erection  of  a  school-house  in 
said  sub-district  in  the  same  manner  as  though  it  had  been 
voted  by  the  district  township  meeting.  Should  the  aggre- 
gate of  sums  thus  applied  for  by  the  respective  sub-dis- 
tricts, exceed  ten  mills  on  the  dollar  in  any  one  year,  on 
the  property  of  the  district  township,  the  board  of  super- 
visors shall  reduce  it  proportionally  to  that  rate. 

BOARD    OF    DIRECTORS. 

SEO.  13.     The  sub-directors  of  the  several  sub-districts  sub-directors 
shall  constitute  a  board  of  directors  for  the  district  town-  hoarder8 


ship,  and  shall  enter  upon  their  duties  on  the  day  fixed  for  tors* 

the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  in  March,  at  which  time 

they  shall  organize  by  electing  from  their  own  number  a  pres- 

ident, who  shall  simply  be  entitled  to  a  vote  as  a  member  of 

the  board  ;  and  from  the  district  township  at  large,  a  secreta- 

ry and  a  treasurer  ,unless  there  are  at  least  five  sub-directors 

in  the  district  township,  in  which  case  they  may  be  selected 

from  the  board.     If  selected  from  the  district  township  at  when  and  how 

large,  they  shall  have  no  vote  in  the  proceedings  of  the  be 

board. 


( e. )  The  u  basis  "  of  apportionment  is  made  by  this  section  "  the 
respective  amounts  previously  levied  upon  said  sub-districts  for 
school-house  purposes."  By  respective  amounts  is  to  be  understood, 
not  the  aggregate  amounts  collected  from  those  sub-districts,  but 
the  previous  rate  of  taxation,  or  the  number  of  mills  assessed  on  the 
dollar. 

The  aim  and  tendency  should  be  to  equalize  the  rate  of  taxation 
for  school-house  purposes,  so  that  in  a  few  years  when  the  rates  are 
leveled  up,  all  such  taxes  may  be  levied  with  absolute  uniformity 
upon  all  the  property  of  the  district  township.  This  will  have  the 
effect  to  greatly  simplify  the  educational  machinery  of  the  state,  and 
to  promote  the  harmony  of  its  operations. 

SEC.  13.  (a)  For  election  of  members  of  the  board,  see  sections 
8  and  10.  The  president  must  in  all  cases  be  a  member  of  the  board. 
The  secretary  and  treasurer  must  be  chosen  from  the  district  at 
large,  unless  there  are  at  least  five  sub-directors  in  the  district. 

(b)  All  the  members  and  officers  of  the  board  must  reside  in  the 
district  township.    They  cannot  reside  in  an  independent  district 
and  remain  members  of  the  board. 

(c)  The  directors  continue  in  office  until  the  regular  meeting  in 
March,  at  which  time  they  should  transfer  the  books  and  papers  to 
their  successors.    See  section  94. 


8  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF   IOWA. 

SEO.  14.      The  board  of  directors  shall  hold  their  regu- 

Keguiar    and    lar  meetings  on  the  third  Monday  in  March  and  September 

?njsiaof  theeet  of  each  year;  and  may  hold  such  special  meetings  as 

occasion  may  require,  at  the  call  of  the  president,  or  by 

request  of  a  majority  of  the  board. 

SEO.  15.      They  shall  make  all  contracts,  purchases, 
The   board  to  payments  and  sales,  necessary  to  carry  out  any  vote  of  the 

make  contracts,  \.  ",    .    ,      ,          ,      ,,  .  i_       i  i  **  t     n 

purchases   and  district;  but  before  erecting  any  school-house,  they  shall 

sales. 


SEC.  14.  Section  31  provides  that  a  majority  of  the  board  shall 
constitute  a  quorum.  It  would  usually  be  well  to 'have  regular 
monthly  meetings  for  the  tranaction  of  business.  Any  duty  imposed 
upon  the  board  as  a  body  must  be  performed  at  a  regular  or  special 
meeting,  and  made  a  matter  of  record.  The  consent  of  the  board  to 
any  particular  measure,  obtained  of  individual  members  when  not 
in  session,  is  not  the  act  of  the  board,  and  is  not  binding  upon  the 
district  township. 

SEC.  15.  (a)  The  board  of  directors  can  make  no  sale  of  real 
estate  unless  authorized  by  the  electors. 

(b)  It  is  the  duty  of  the  board  of  directors  to  make  contracts  for 
the  erection  of  school-houses,  when  the  means  have  been  provided 
by  the  electors.    If  the  sub-director  be  appointed  a  committee  for 
this  purpose,  it  should  be  with  certain  limitations  ;  and  the  contract 
should  be  reported  to  the  board  for  approval.    (Sec.  47.) 

(c)  The  board  cannot  be  required  to  commence  the  construction 
of  a  house,  until  means  to  a  reasonable  extent  have  been  provided. 

(d)  Before  making  a  contract,  great  pains  should  be  taken  to 
obtain  the  best  possible  plan  for  the  building.     On  this  point  the 
law  requires  consultation  with  the  county  superintendent. 

(e)  Public  school-houses    are  exempt  from  sale  on   execution. 
Revision  of  1860r  sec.  3274. 

(/)  A  board  of  directors  of  a  school  district  may  bind  a  corpora- 
tion by  contracts  entered  into  after  the  election  of  their  successors 
and  before  their  qualification.  Dubuque  Female  College  v.  The  Dis- 
trict Township  of  the  City  of  Dubuque,  XIII.  Iowa,  555.  While 
instances  may  occur  in  which  the  interests  of  the  district  will  be 
subserved  by  making  contracts  with  teachers  and  others,  which  will 
not  expire  for  months  after  a  charge  of  officers,  courtesy  as  well  as 
justice  dictate  the  impropriety  of  making  contracts  whose  execution 
will  embarrass  successors  in  office.  Ordinarily  the  new  board 
should  make  contracts  for  the  year  which  they  serve. 

A  board  of  directors  may  ratify  or  adopt  such  acts  of  officers  de 
facto  as  the  law  would  permit  officers  de  jure  to  perform,  XIII. 
Iowa,  555. 

(g)    The  board  of  directors  of  a  district  township  have  no  power 


determine 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  9 

consult  with  the  county  superintendent  as  to  the  most 
approved  plan  of  such  building. 

SEC.  16.     They  shall  fix  the  site  for  each  school-house,  ^ 
taking  into  consideration  the  geographical  position  and  and 
convenience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the  sub-dis- 
trict,  and  shall  determine  what  number  of  schools  shall  be 
taught  in  each  sub-district,  and,  for  what  additional  time 
beyond  the  period  required  by  law  they  shall  be  continued 
during  each  year. 


to  make  contracts  for  the  purchase  of  maps,  charts,  and  other  school 
apparatus,  without  being  first  authorized  thereto  by  a  vote  of  the 
electors.  Taylor  v.  The  District  Township  of  Otter  Creek,  XXVI. 
Iowa,  281 ;  also,  Taylor  v.  District  Township  of  Wayne.  XXV.  Iowa, 
447. 

SEC.  16.  (a.)  The  power  to  locate  sites  for  school-houses  is  ves- 
ted originally,  exclusively  in  the  board  of  directors.  This  authority 
should  be  exercised  with  great  care,  and  without  prejudice ;  and  the 
wishes  of  the  people,  for  whom  the  house  is  designed,  should  be 
consulted  as  far  as  practicable,  taking  into  account  the  prospective 
as  well  as  the  present  convenience  of  the  people  of  the  sub-district. 
(6.)  The  power  of  the  board  of  directors  to  "  fix  the  site  for  a 
school-house,  carries  with  it  the  power  to  re-locate  that  site.  Vance 
v.  District  Township  of  Wilton.  XXIII  Iowa,  408.  The  exercise 
of  this  power  is  a  proper  and  necessary  adjunct  of  the  power  to 
make  alterations  in  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts.  The  extension 
of  settlements  frequently  changes  the  centers  of  population  and  ne- 
cessitates a  change  of  sub-district  boundaries,  and  the  removal  of 
school-houses  to  central  localities  in  the  new  sub  districts.  See  In- 
structor and  School  Journal,  Feb.,  1868,  p.  145. 

(c.)  A  site  near  the  geographical  center  of  the  sub-district 
should  be  chosen,  unless  controlling  circumstances  indicate  a  differ- 
ent selection.  If  possible,  the  site  should  be  in  the  shelter  of  a 
natural  or  artificial  grove ;  and  ought  to  include  from  one  acre  to 
four  acres  of  ground. 

(d.)  More  than  one  school-house  may  be  built  in  a  sub-district,  if 
the  electors  so  determine,  but  the  board  determines  the  number  of 
schools  to  be  taught. 

(e.)  As  regards  the  length  of  time  during  which  schools  are  to  be 
taught  in  each  sub-district,  twenty-four  weeks  is  the  minimum,  (sec. 
76) ;  the  maximum  is  expressly  unlimited.  It  is  in  the  discretion 
of  the  board,  to  provide  schools  the  year  round,  and  to  assess  taxes 
for  their  support ;  subject  however  to  the  limitations  contained  in 
sec.  54. 


10  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

SEC.  17.     They  may  establish  graded  or  union  schools 

TO     establish  wherever  they  may  be  necessary,  and  may  select  a  persoa 

ol8'  who  shall  have  the  general  supervision  of  the  schools  in 

their  district,  subject  to  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the 

board. 

SEC.  18.     They  shall  appoint  a  temporary  president  and 

TO^  an  vacan-  secretary  in  case  of  the  absence  of  the  regular  officers,  and 

shall  fill  any  vacancy  that  may  occur  in  the  office  of  pres- 

ident, secretary  or  treasurer,  or  in  the  board  of  directors. 

TO  re  uire  sec       ^EO*  ^'      They  8na^  require  the  secretary  and  treas- 

rotaryand  tJ£  urer,  each,  to  give  bond  to  the  district,  in  such  penalty 

surer    to     give 


bond. 


SEC.  17.  Tliis  section  gives  the  board  authority  to  establish  town- 
ship graded  schools.  Such  a  school,  open  to  the  older  and  more  ad- 
vanced pupils  from  everv  sub-district,  may  be  advantageously  estab- 
lished at  some  central  point  in  every  district  township.  In  sparsely- 
settled  townships,  a  building  with  two  departments  or  rooms  would 
suffice,  and  circumstances  might  not  require  that  a  school  should  be 
taught  in  the  higher  department,  except  during  the  Winter.  Of 
course,  a  village  or  town  would  require  more  liberal  provisions. 

£EC.  18.  (a.)  A  vacancy  can  be  created  only  by  death,  removal, 
resignation,  or  failure  to  elect  at  the  proper  election,  there  being  no 
incumbent  to  continue  in  office.  The  law  makes  provision  for  all 
other  contingencies.  For  instance,  a  failure  to  elect  or  qualify  does 
not  create  a  vacancy  ;  for  the  officer  is  continued  in  office  "  until  his 
successor  is  elected  and  qualified."  Neither  does  a  change  in  the 
boundaries  of  sub-districts  create  a  vacancy  ;  for  the  change  does 
not  take  effect  until  the  next  sub-district  election  after  it  is  made. 
If  a  sub-district  should  be  divided,  so  as  to  form  a  new  one,  the  sub- 
director  would  continue  to  act,  as  though  no  change  had  been  made, 
until  the  expiration  of  his  official  term.  (sec.  24,  proviso,  and  note 
on  the  same  ;  also  section  13  and  note.) 

(b)  It  a  person  without  the  requisite  qualifications,  is  elected  a 
member  of  the  board  and  acts  with  the  board,  he  being  a  member 
de  facto,  his  acts  will  be  valid  ;  but  when  his  disqualification  becomes 
known,  the  board  should  declare  the  place  vacant  and  elect  his  suc- 
cessor. 

(c)  School  directors  may  resign  at  any  time.    A  verbal  resigna- 
tion may  be  tendered  to  the  board   when  in  session  ;  or  a  written 
resignation  may  be  handed  to  some  member  of  the  board  to  present 
at  a  subsequent  meeting,  for  the  board's  acceptance.    When  a  school 
director  habitually  neglects  the  duties  of  his  office,  he  may  be  com- 
pelled by  mandamus  to  perform  them  ;  or,  it  is  believed,  the  board 
may  in7  its  discretion  declare  the  place  vacant,  and  elect  his  suc- 
cessor. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  ]_]_ 

and  with  such  securities  as  they  may  deem  necessary  to 
secure  the  district  against  loss,  conditioned  for  the  faithful 
performance  of  their  official  duties.  The  bond  shall  be 
tiled  with  the  president,  and  in  case  of  a  breach  of  the 
conditions  thereof,  he  shall  bring  suit  thereon  in  the  name 
of  the  district  township. 

SEO.  20.     They  shall,  from  time  to  time,  examine  the  TO  examine  ac- 

t_  ,  -  ,  *    1        1    •  COU.nt    OI     TlCaS- 

accounts  of  the  treasurer,  and  make  settlement  with  him ;  urer  and  report 
and  shall  present  at  each  regular  meeting  of  the  electors  ing.lstl 
of  the  district  township,  a  full  statement  of  the  receipts  and 
expenditures  of  the  district  township,  arid  such  other  infor- 
mation as  may  be  deemed  important. 

SEC.  21.     They  shall  audit  and  allow  all  iust  claims  Audit     claims 

IT*.  T  n      A.I  ,  •  <»    ,1  against  the  dis- 

against  the  district,  and  nx  the  compensation  01   me  sec-  trict. 
retary  and  treasurer;  and  no  order  shall  be  drawn  on  the 


SEC.  20.  This  section  contemplates  that  a  full  report  of  the  affairs 
of  the  district  shall  be  made  by  the  board  at  each  annual  meeting  of 
the  electors.  This  work  appropriately  devolves  upon  the  president, 
unless  the  board  designates  some  other  member.  When  practicable, 
the  report  should  be  published. 

SEC.  21.  (a)  The  requirements  of  this  section  are  imperat;ve 
and  comprehensive.  "  Tliey  shall  audit  and  allow  all  just  claims 
against  the  district."  All  demands,  whether  by  contract  or  other- 
wise, must  be  approved  by  the  board  of  directors  when  in  session, 
before  an  order  can  be  drawn  on  the  district  treasury  for  them ;  and 
no  officer  can  draw  an  order  on  the  treasury,  unless  he  is  authorized 
to  do  so  by  a  vote  of  the  board,  at  a  regular  or  special  meeting.  It 
is  the  duty  of  the  board  to  examine  all  contracts  for  the  employment 
of  teachers,  and  the  construction  of  school -houses,  or  for  any  other 
purpose,  and  to  see  that  the  stipulations  have  been  complied  with, 
before  they  authorize  the  payment  of  money  therefor. 

(6)  School  orders  issued  without  a  vote  of  the  board  of  directors 
or  otherwise  illegally  issued,  although  they  may  be  signed  by  the 
president  and  countersigned  by  the  secretary,  are  not  binding  upon 
the  district ;  neither  can  they  acquire  validity  by  being  transferred 
to  third  parties.  If  illegal  when  issued  they  are  illegal  forever.  (19 
Iowa,  199  and  248.  Quere.  When  school  officers  transcend  the  pro- 
visions of  law,  do  they  not  become  individually  responsible  ? 

(c)  School  orders  drawing  any  specified  rate  of  interest  can  not 
legally  be  issued.    If  not  paid  on  presentation,  however,  they  will 
draw  interest  at  the  rate  of  six  per  cent,  per  annum.    (Section  118.) 

(d)  District    townships    and  sub-districts  have  no    authority  to 
issue  bonds  or  other  evidence  of  indebtedness  for  the  purpose  of 
borrowing  money.    See  opinion  of  Attorney-General  O'Connor,  in 


12  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

district  treasury  until  the  claim  for  which  it  is  drawn  has 
been  so  audited  and  allowed. 

SEC.  22.      They  shall  visit  the  schools  in  their  district, 
visit    school*,  and  aid  the  teachers  in  establishing  and  enforcing  rules  for 
ruiL  foitatheir  the  government  of  the  schools;  and  see  that  they  keep  a 
eovernment.-  correct  list  of  the  pupils,  embracing  the  periods  of  time 
during  which  they  have  attended  school,  the  branches 
taught,  and  such  other  matters  as  may  be  required  by  the 
county  superintendent.    In  case  a  teacher  employed  in  any 
of  the  schools  of  the  district  township  is  found  to  be  incom- 
May  expel      petent,  or  is  guilty  of  partiality  or  dereliction,  in  the  dis- 
teaehersforsnf-  charge  of   his   duties,  or  for   any  other  sufficient  cause 


shown.  °a        shown,  the  board  of  directors  may,  after  a  full  and  fair 


the  School  Journal  for  April,  1868,  page  210.     Independent  districts 
may  issue  bonds,    (section  115.) 

(e)    Only  the  secretary  and  treasurer  can  receive  any  compensation 
for  the  discharge  of  duties  required  by  law.     (section  31.) 

SEC.  22.  (a)  By  the  general  principles  of  law  as  applied  to 
systems  of  common  schools  throughout  the  country,  boards  of  direc- 
tors have  entire  control  of  the  public  schools,  as  well  as  the  teachers 
employed  to  instruct  them.  By  virtue  of  this  general  oversight  and 
responsibility,  the  directors,  as  a  board  may  establish  such  rules  and 
regulations  for  the  government  of  teachers  and  pupils,  not  inconsist- 
ent with  law,  as  the  interests  of  the  schools  require.  The  teacher  is 
the  agent  of  the  board,  and  the  rules  made  and  enforced  by  the 
teacher  with  either  the  formal  or  tacit  consent  of  the  board,  are  in 
effect  the  rules  of  the  board.  The  teacher  is  not  answerable  to  the 
individual  patrons  of  the  school  for  the  manner  in  which  the  duties 
of  instruction  are  performed ;  but  is  amenable  to  the  board  alone. 

(b)  It  is  competent  for  boards  of  directors  to  provide  by  rules, 
that  pupils  may  be  suspended  from  the  schools  in  case  they  shall  be 
absent  or  tardy,  a  certain  number  of  times  within  a  fixed  period, 
except  for  sickness,  or  other  unavoidable  cause. 

Burdick  &  Chandler  v.  Baboock  and  others,  XXXI,  Iowa,  p pub- 
lished in  School  Journal  for  August,  1871. 

(c)  Boards  of  directors  have  undoubted  right  to  dismiss  teachers 
for  good  cause  shown.    Investigation  of  cases  of  alleged  inconiDe- 
tency  and  dereliction,  should  be  conducted  impartially ;  exercising 
care  not  to  needlessly  injure  a  teacher's  reputation. 

In  case  the  board  passes  an  order  to  dismiss,  the  material  reason 
therefor  fchould  be  spread  upon  the  record  ;  for,  while  in  case  of  con- 
test these  reasons  would  not  be  conclu&ive  against  the  teacher,  the 
board  would  be  estopped  from  presenting  other  reasons  than  those 
named  in  the  record.  Neville  v.  School  Directors,  36  111.  71. 

When  a  teacher  is  unjustly  dismissed,  the  proper  remedy  is  not  an 


SCHOOL  LAWS.  OF  IOWA.  13 

investigation  of  the  facts  of  the  case,  at  a  meeting  con- 
vened for  the  purpose,  at  which  the  teacher  shall  be 
permitted  to  be  present  and  make  his  defense,  expel  him 
from  school,  and  direct  the  sub-director  to  discharge  him. 

SEO.  23.     They  shall,  at  their  regular  meeting  in  March  gJ^gJkJj 
of  each  year,  require  the  secretary  to  file  with  the  clerk  of  with  county  of- 
the  board  of  supervisors,  county  superintendent,  and  county 
treasurer,  each,  a  certificate  of  the  election,   qualification, 
and   post-office  address  of  the  president,    secretary,  and 
treasurer  of  the  district  township,  and  to  advise  them  from 
time   to  time   of  any   changes   made  in  said  offices  by 
appointment. 

SEC.  24.     They  shall,  at  their  regular  meeting  in  Sep-  TO  divide 
tember,  or  at  any  special  meeting  called  thereafter  for  that  {So 
purpose,  divide  their  township  into  sub-districts,  such  as  tr 
justice,  equity,   and   the  interests  of  the  people  require; 
and  may  make  such  alterations  of  the  boundaries  of  sub- 
districts,  heretofore  formed,  as  may  be  deemed  necessary; 
and  shall  designate  such  sub-districts  and  all  subsequent 


appeal  to  the  county  superintendent,  but  a  suit  on  the  contract  with 
the  board.  The  teacher  can  be  paid  only  to  the  date  of  legal 
dismissal. 

SEC.  23.  It  is  very  important  that  the  secretary  should  file  the 
certificate  with  the  county  officers  named — otherwise,  the  money8 
belonging  to  the  district  may  be  improperly  paid  to  persons  not  au- 
thorized to  receive  them.  This  duty  should  be  performed  by  the  secre- 
tary immediately  after  his  election  and  qualification  ;  and  whenever 
a  change  is  made,  the  county  officers  should  be  notified-  See  note 
(b)  to  section  89. 

SEC.  24.  (  a. )  The  duties  prescribed  in  this  section  are  exceed- 
ingly important.  It  is  not  designed  that  the  plat  should  be  an  ex- 
pensive one,  or  that  it  should  be  projected  with  mathematical 
exactness.  Any  person  who  is  competent  to  perform  the  duties  of 
secretary,  can  procure  the  paper  (common  drawing  paper)  and  make 
one  that  will  subserve  all  practical  purposes.  The  record  describ- 
ing the  sections  and  parts  of  sections  ot  which  each  sub-district  is 
composed,  is  the  most  essential  thing.  See  Form  No.  8. 

(  b. )  The  design  of  the  law  is  that  all  alterations  should  be  made 
between  the  third  Monday  in  September,  and  the  first  Monday  in 
March.  They  ought  to  be  completed  at  such  time  in  February  as 
will  permit  the  proper  notice  to  be  given  for  the  election  of  a  sub- 
director  on  the  first  Monday  of  March,  (section  8.)  It  requires  a 
vote  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members  of  the  board  of  directors  to  make 
any  changes  in  the  boundaries  oi  sub-districts,  (section  31.) 

( c. )     By  congressional  divisions  of  land  is  meant  those  divisions 


14  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 

alterations,  in  a  distinct  and  legible  manner,  upon  a  plat 
of  the  district  provided  for  that  purpose;  and  shall  cause 
a  written  description  of  the  same  to  be  recorded  in  the 
district  records;  a  copy  of  which  shall  be  delivered  by  the 
secretary  to  the  county  treasurer,  and  also  to  the  clerk  of 
the  board  of  supervisors,  who  shall  record  the  same  in  his 
Must  conform  office:  Provided,  That  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts  shall 

to  congressiou-  ,  '  .  .«••... 

ai lines.  contorm  to  the   lines  oi  congressional   divisions  ol  land; 

and  that  the  formation  and  alteration  of  sub-districts,  as 
contemplated  in  this  section,  shall  riot  take  eifect  until  the 
next  sub-district  election  thereafter;  at  which  election  a 
sub-director  shall  be  elected  for  the  new  sub-district 
formed. 

SEC.  25.  In  cases  where,  by  reason  of  streams  or  other 
May  form  sub- natural  obstacles,  any  portion  of  the  inhabitants  of  any 
partner  twfo°cS  school-district  township  cannot,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
townships?*™0*  county  superintendent,  with  reasonable  facility,  enjoy  the 
advantages  of  any  school  in  their  township,  the  said 
county  superintendent,  with  the  consent  of  the  board  of 
directors  of  such  district  township  as  may  be  affected 
thereby,  may  attach  such  part  of  said  township  to  an  ad- 
joining township,  and  erect  a  new  sub-district  with  part 
of  the  said  adjoining  township,  and  the  order  erecting  the 
same  shall  be  transmitted  to  the  township  district  clerk  in 
each  district,  and  be  by  him  recorded  in  his  records  of 
sub-districts,  and  the  proper  entry  made  on  his  plat  of 
sub-districts,  and  such  order  shall  designate  the  township 
district  to  which  the  new  sub-district  shall  be  attached, 
and  all  sub-Jistricts  heretofore  formed,  conforming  sub- 


authorized  by  Congress  in  government,  surveys,  of  which  the  small- 
est is,  in  general,  one-sixteenth  of  a  section,  or  a  tract  of  forty  acres 
in  a  square  form.  Government  lines,  however  sometimes  meander 
along  streams  and  other  bodies  of  water,  and  divisions  of  land  are 
formed  of  less  than  forty  acres. 

SEC.  25.  (  a. )  This  section  contains  the  only  provision  of  law 
under  which  a  sub-district  can  be  formed  from  parts  of  two  or  more 
district  townships;  and  in  proceedings  thereunder,  the  law  should 
be  strictly  complied  with,  else  the  organization  will  be  invalid. 

(6.)  btreams  well  bridged  and  distance  are  not  "natural  obsta- 
cles "  in  the  contemplation  of  the  law. 

(c. )  The  law  contemplates  that  such  a  sub-district  shall  be 
formed  only  by  the  concurrent  action  of  the  board  of  directors  and 
the  county  superintendent;  hence,  it  follows  that  there  could  be  no 
appeal  from  the  refusal  of  the  board  to  give  its  "consent,"  as  that 
would  throw  the  whole  matter  in  the  hands  of  the  superintendent. 


SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA.  15 

stantially  to  the  principles  above  expressed,  are  hereby 
declared  to  be  legal  and  as  valid  as  if  formed  under  this 
provision. 

SEC.  26.     In  all  cases  where  territory  has  been  or  may  Territory   may 

, .    .     .  "\  .      „  ,        ,         J  be    restored   to 

be  set  into  an  adjoining  county  or  township  tor  school  pur-  the  township  in 

poses,  such  territory  may  be  restored  by  the  concurrence 

of  the  respective   boards  of  directors ;  but  on  the  written  longs- 

application  of  two-thirds  of  the  electors  residing  upon  the 

territory  within  the  township  in  which  the  school-house  is 

not  situated,  the  said  boards  shall  restore  the   territory  to 

the  township  district  in  which  it  geographically  belongs. 

SEO.  27.     In  case  an  independent   district  embraces  a 
part  or  the  whole  of  a  civil  township  which  has  no  sepa-  tJcEe1d??oin  f®_~ 
rate  district  township  organization,  upon  the  written  appli-  dependent  dis- 
cation  of  two-thirds  of  the  electors  residing  upon  the  terri-    ' 
tory  of  such   independent  district   and   within  such  civil 
township,  to  the  board  of  directors,  they  shall  set  off  such 
territory,  whether  provided  with  school-houses  or  not,  to 
be  organized  as  a  district  township  in  the  manner  provided 
for  such  organization,  when  anew  civil  township  is  formed. 

SEC.  28.     They  shall  apportion  any  tax  voted  by  the 
district  township  meeting  for  school-house  fund,  among 


SEC.  28.  ( a. )  Whatever  amount  of  sehool-house  tax  the  district 
township  mee'ing  may  vote,  (sec.  7),  must  be  apportioned  among 
the  several  sub-districts  of  the  district  township,  as  provided  in  the 
first  part  of  this  section. 

( b. )  In  case  the  electors  of  the  district  township  vote  an  amount 
less  than  that  determined  by  the  electors  of  the  sub-district,  but  yet 
an  amount  which  the  board  of  directors  deem  adequate  for  the 
erection  of  a  suitable  house,  then  the  amount  voted  by  the  district 
township  electors  must  be  apportioned  among  the  sub-districts  as 
provided  in  the  first  part  of  this  section,  and  the  difference  between 
the  amount  voted  by  the  district  township  electors,  (sec.  7),  and 
that  determined  by  the  electors  of  the  sub-district  (sec.  11)  must  be 
levied  on  the  sub-district  making  the  appl'cation  as  directed  in  the 
proviso  of  this  section.  In  either  case,  the  whole  amount  requested 
by  the  sub  district  must  be  levied.  To  illustrate  :  suppose  the  sub- 
district  meeting  requests  $1200,  for  a  school-house,  and  the  district 
township  meeting  votes  $1000;  the  $1000  must  be  apportioned 
among  the  sub-districts  of  the  township,  and  the  excess  $200  must  be 
levied  directly  upon  the  sub-district  making  the  application,  in  ad- 
dition to  its  equitable  share  of  the  $1000  apportioned. 

( c. )  No  school-7iouse  tax  can  be  apportioned  by  the  board  of 
directors  or  reported  to  the  board  of  supervisors,  unless  it  has  been 
first  voted  by  the  electors,  either  of  the  sub-district  or  of  the  dis- 
trict township. 


16  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

?c°hooiaCe°n  ti16  several  sub-districts  in  such  a  manner  as  justice  and 
*«*•  equity  may  require,  taking  as  the  basis  of  said  apportion- 

ment the  respective  amounts  previously  levied  upon  said 
sub-districts,  for  the  use  of  such  fund,  provided  that  if  the 
electors  of  one  or  more  sub-districts  at  their  last  annual 
meeting  shall  have  voted  to  raise  a  sum  for  school-house 

Eurposes,  greater  than  that  granted  by  the  electors  at  the 
ist  annual  meeting  of  the  district  township,  they  shall 
estimate  the  amount  of  such  excess  on  such  sub-district, 
or  sub-districts,  and  cause  the  secretary  to  certify  the  same 
within  five  days  thereafter,  to  the  board  of  supervisors, 
who  shall,  at  the  time  of  levying  taxes  for  county  pur- 
poses, levy  the  per  centum  of  such  excess  on  the  taxable 
properly  of  the  sub-districts  asking  the  same,  provided  that 
not  more  than  fifteen  mills  on  the  dollar  shall  be  levied  on 
the  taxable  property  of  any  sub-district  for  any  one  year 
for  school-house  purposes. 

SEC.  29.  They  shall,  at  their  regular  meeting  in  March 
Toicyy  tax  for  of  each  year,  or  at  a  special  meeting  convened  for  that 
tSSSSL  °  purpose,  between  the  time  designated  for  such  regular 
meeting  and  the  third  Monday  in  May,  estimate  the 
amount  required  for  the  "  contingent  fund,"  and  also  such 
sum  as  may  be  required  for  the  "  teachers'  fund,"  in 
addition  to  the  amount  received  from  the  semi-annual 
apportionment,  as  shown  by  the  notice  from  the  clerk  of 
the  board  of  supervisors,  to  support  the  schools  of  the 
district  for  the  time  required  by  law  for  the  current  year; 
and  shall  cause  the  secretary  to  certify  the  same  within 
five  days  thereafter  to  the  board  of  supervisors,  who  shall, 
at  the  time  of  levying  taxes  for  county  purposes,  levy 
the  per  centum  necessary  to  raise  the  sum  thus  certified, 
upon  the  property  of  the  district  township,  which  shall  be 
collected  and  paid  over  as  other  district  taxes  are:  Pro- 
vided, That  if  the  electors  of  one  or  more  sub-districts,  at 

SEC.  29.  (a)  This  section,  as  amended  by  section  54  of  this 
chapter,  requires  boards  of  directors  to  certify  the  amount  iiidollars, 
necessary  to  be  raised  for  teachers'  and  contingent  fund  to  the  board 
of  supervisors,  whose  duty  it  is  to  estimate  and  levy  the  per  centum 
necessary  to  raise  the  amount  so  certified. 

(b)  Section  54  limits  the  amount  which  may  be  levied  in  a  district 
township  for  any  ony  one  year  to  twenty-five  dollars  per  scholar  for 
teachers'  fund,  and  five  dollars  per  scholar  for  contingent  fund. 

(c)  The  teachers'  and  contingent  fund  are  not  to  be  apportioned 
ainoug  the  sub-districts,  but  levied  uniformly  on  the  taxable  prop- 
erty of  the  district  township,  with  only  one  possible  exception,  that 
named  in  the  proviso  of  this  section. 


SCHOOL  LVWS  OF  IOWA.  17 

their  last  annual  meeting,  shall  have  voted  to  hold  a  school 
exceeding  the  time  required  by  law,  and  exceeding  the 
time  provided  for  by  the  estimate  aforesaid,  it  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  board  to  estimate  the  cost  of  such  excess,  and 
cause  the  same  to  be  certified  as  aforesaid;  in  which  case 
it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  board  of  supervisors  to  levy 
such  excess  upon  the  property  of  the  sub-district  voting 
therefor,  and  which  shall  be  collected  and  paid  over  as 
aforesaid. 

SEC.  30.     They  shall  make  such  rules  and  regulations  Rules  for  go/- 
as  may   be  necessary  for  the  direction  and  restriction  of  direcSra.of 
sub-directors  in  the  discharge  of  their  official  duties,  and 
not  inconsistent  with  law. 

SEO.  31.     A  majority  of  the  board  of  directors  shall  be  A  majority  of 
a  quorum  to  transact  business,  but  a  less  number  may  constitme  a  to 
adjourn  from  time  to  time,  and  no  tax  shall  be  levied  by  <i"°rum- 
the  board  after  the  third  Monday  in  May  ;  nor  shall  the 
boundaries  of  sub-districts  be  changed  except  by  a  vote  of 
the  majority  of  the  board.     JS~or  shall  the  members  of  the 
board,  except  its  secretary  and  treasurer,  receive  pay  out 
of  any   school   funds   for   services   rendered  under  this 
chapter. 

PRESIDENT. 

SEC.  32.     The  president  shall  preside  at  all  meetings 

SEC.  30.  These  rules  should  be  carefully  prepared  and  adopted 
by  the  board  of  directors,  and  recorded  with  their  proceedings,  and 
each  sub-director  should  be  furnished  with  a  copy.  The  sub-director 
is  clothed  with  certain  general  powers  by  section  47,  but  these  are  to 
be  exercised  under  the  direction  of  the  board.  The  board  may 
restrict  him,  for  example,  as  to  the  compensation  of  teachers  ;  when 
he  shall  employ  a  teacher,  and  for  what  time ;  the  extent  of  repairs, 
and  prices  paid  for  same;  and  the  amount  and  cost  of  fuel.  The 
board  should  regulate  the  compensation  of  teachers,  allowing  such 
wages  as  the  wants  of  each  sub-district  may  require.  True  economy 
in  the  expenditure  of  the  public  money  should  always  be  consulted  ; 
but  it  does  not  usually  consist  in  the  purchase  of  the  poorest  mate- 
rial, nor  in  the  employment  of  the  cheapest  teachers. 

SEC.  31.  Any  compensation  paid  to  any  other  member  of  the 
board,  than  the  secretary  and  treasurer,  for  the  performance  of  any 
official  duties,  is  in  direct  opposition  to  the  law,  and  an  ope.n  viola- 
tion of  the  solemn  oath  of  office. 

SEC.  32.  (a)  The  president  can  draw  no  order  on  the  district 
S3 


18  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

President  to  of  tli G  board  of  directors,  and  of  the  district  township  ; 
Srnwlfrafts  ana  shall  draw  all  drafts  on  the  county  treasurer  for  money 
orders.  apportioned  to  his  district  ;  sign  all  orders  on  the  district 

treasury,  specifying  in  the  order  the  fund  on  which  they 
are  drawn,  and  the  use  for  which  the  money  is  appropri- 
ated, and  shall  sign  all  contracts  made  by  the  board. 

SEO.  33.     He  shall  appear  in  behalf  of  his  district  in 

Presid^ent_to^ap-  all  suits  brought  by  or  against  the  same,  but  when  he  is 

Fn*nit8.c  1S    c  individually  a  party   this  duty  shall  be  performed  by  the 

secretary  ;  and  in  all  cases  where  suits  may  be  instituted 

by  or  against  any  of  the  school  officers  to  enforce  any  of 

the  provisions  herein  contained,  counsel  may  be  employed 

by  the  board  of  directors. 

SECRETARY. 

SEC.  34.  The  secretary  shall  record  all  the  proceed- 
cortet^oc0eed-  m£8  °^  ^Q  board  and  district  meetings,  in  separate  books 
ings  and  regis-  kept  for  that  purpose  ;  shall  preserve  copies  of  all  reports 

treasury  except  by  authority  of  the  board  of  directors.  See  section 
21  and  notes  thereto ;  also  note  (c)  to  section  34. 

(&)  The  president  should  not  act  as  secretary  or  treasurer  of  the 
board.  In  the  absence  of  the  president,  or  when  he  refuses  to  dis- 
charge the  proper  duties  of  his  office,  a  temporary  president  may  be 
appointed,  who,  during  the  time  he  is  acting  as  president,  may  sign 
orders  and  contracts,  and  do  all  other  acts  proper  to  be  done  by  the 
president. 

(c)  The  failure  of  an  officer  to  attach  his  official  title  to  his  signa- 
ture, will  not  affect  the  instrument  so  far  as  the  district  is  concerned  ; 
provided,  the  contract  was  authorized  and  made  for  the  district,  and 
this  fact  can  be  shown. 

SEC.  34.  ( a )  It  is  essential  that  the  record  of  the  proceedings 
of  the  board  and  district  meetings  should  be  properly  kept.  Every 
transaction  should  be  carefully  noted,  and  the  proceedings  should 
be  read  at  the  close  of  the  meeting,  and  approved.  The  registry  of 
orders  is  also  an  important  matter.  Every  order  drawn  should  be 
promptly  reported  to  the  district  treasurer,  as  he  has  no  means  of 
determining  the  amount  of  outstanding  orders,  and  hence  cannot 
comply  with  the  law  requiring  him  to  make  partial  payments.  See 
section  37  and  note  on  same,  and  Form  No.  12. 

( &)  The  failure  of  the  secretary  to  record  all  the  proceedings  of 
the  board  and  of  district  meetings  in  separate  books,  kept  for  that 
purpose,  will  not  render  the  proceedings  void.  Higgins  v.  Reed,  et 
at,  VIII.  Iowa,  298. 

( c )    The  secretary  as  well  as  the  president  and  treasurer  should 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  ]_g 

made  to  the  county  superintendent ;  shall  file  all  papers 
transmitted  to  him  pertaining  to  the  business  of  the  dis- 
trict ;  shall  countersign  all  drafts  and  orders  drawn  by 
the  president,  and  shall  keep  a  register  of  all  orders 
drawn  on  the  district  treasury,  showing  the  number  of  the 
order,  date,  name  of  the  person  in  whose  favor  drawn,  the 
fund  on  which  it  is  drawn,  for  what  purpose,  and  the 
amount ;  and  shall,  from  time  to  time,  furnish  the  dis- 
trict treasurer  with  a  transcript  of  the  same. 

SEC.  35.     He  shall  give  ten  days'  previous  notice  of  secretary      to 
the  district  township  meeting,  by  posting  a  written  notice  §}eeting°tice  of 
in  five  conspicuous  places  therein,  one   of  which  shall 
be  at  or  near  the  last  place  of  meeting,  and  shall  furnish 
a  copy  of  the  same  to  the  teacher  of  the  school,  if  in  ses- 
sion, of  each  sub-district,  to  be  read  in  the  presence  of  the 
pupils  thereof,  and  such  notice  shall,  in  all  cases,  state  the 
hour  of  meeting. 

SEC.  36.     He  shall  keep  an  accurate  account  of  all  the  TO  keep  and  re- 
expenses  incurred  by  the  district,  and  shall  present  the  expenses""* 
same  to  the  board  of  directors,  to  be  audited  and  paid  as 
herein  provided. 

SEC.  37.     The  secretary  shall  charge  the  treasurer  of  secretary  to  de- 
the  district  with  all  warrants  drawn  in  his  favor,  and  Seas^rer.0™^ 
credit  him  with  all  warrants  drawn  on  the  funds  in  his 
hands,  keeping  separate  accounts  with  each  fund. 

SEC.  38.  Whenever  a  tax  has  been  voted  by  any  dis-  To  certify  tax 
trict  township,  for  purposes  in  this  chapter  specified,  the  p^rv°sors°f  sn" 
secretary  shall  immediately  certify  the  amount  to  the 


conform  to  the  instructions  of  the  board  so  far  as  those  instructions 
are  in  accordance  with  law ;  but  they  should  not  obey  the  board 
when  directed  to  do  an  illegal  act.  The  law,  the  creator  of  the 
board,  is  higher  than  the  board,  its  creature.  If,  for  instance,  the 
board  appropriates  money  to  pay  its  members,  other  than  the 
secretary  and  treasurer,  (sections  21  and  81),  or  for  any  other  illegal 
purpose,  the  president  and  secretary  should  refuse  to  sign  the  order, 
and  the  treasurer  refuse  to  pay  it. 

The  secretary  should  not  act  as  president  or  treasurer.  See  notes 
to  sections  21  and  32. 

SEC.  35.     See  sections  8  and  93,  and  notes  on  same. 

SEC.  37.  This  section  requires  the  district  secretary  to.  keep  an 
account  current  with  the  district  treasurer.  This  account  should  be 
carefully  compared  with  a  similar  one  kept  by  the  treasurer,  at  the 
regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  on  the  third  Monday  in 
March.  It  will  also  constitute  part  of  the  report  to  the  district 
meeting,  as  provided  in  section  20. 


20  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA, 

board  of  supervisors,  who  shall,  at  the  time  of  levying 
the  tax  for  county  purposes,  levy  a  tax  of  the  amount 
thus  certified  to  them,  upon  the  assessed  value  of  all  the 
real  and  personal  property  in  the  district,  which  shall  be 
collected  by  the  county  treasurer  at  the  same  time  and  in 
the  same  manner  as  state  and  county  taxes  are  collected, 
but  it  shall  be  receivable  only  in  cash. 

SEO.  39.     Between  the  fifteenth  and  twentieth  days  of 

TO  make  an  an-  September  in  each  year,  the  secretary  of  each  school 

report,      District  shall  file  with  the  county  superintendent  a  report 

of    the  affairs  of  the  district,  which  shall   contain   the 

following  items,  viz: 

First — The  number  of  persons,  male  and  female,  each, 
in  his  district,  between  the  ages  of  five  and  twenty-one 
years. 

Second—  The  number  of  schools,  and  the  branches 
taught. 

Third — The  number  of  pupils,  and  the  average  attend- 
ance of  the  same  in  each  school. 

Fourth — The  number  of  teachers  employed,  and  the 
average  compensation  paid  per  week,  distinguishing  males 
from  females. 

Fifth — The  length  of  school  in  days,  and  the  average 
cost  of  tuition  per  week  for  each  scholar. 

/Sixth — The  aggregate  amount  paid  teachers  during  the 
year,  and  the  balance  of  teachers'  fund  in  the  district 
treasury. 

Seventh — The  text-books  used,  and  the  number  of  vol- 
umes in  the  district  library,  and  the  value  of  apparatus 
belonging  to  the  district. 

.Eighth — The  number  of  school-houses,  and  their  esti- 
mated value. 

Ninth — The  amount  raised  within  the  year  by  district 
tax  for  the  erection  of  school-houses,  the  amount  for 
teachers'  fund,  and  for  other  purposes  of  this  chapter, 
stating  separately  the  amount  for  each. 

Tenth — The  amount  of  public  fund  received  from  the 
semi-annual  apportionments  made  by  the  clerk  of  the 
board  of  supervisors,  and  if  any,  from  other  sources,  stat- 
ing what,  and  how  much  from  each,  and  such  other  infor- 
mation as  he  may  deem  useful. 


SEC.  39.  The  secretary  should  record  the  report,  required  by  this 
section,  in  the  district  records.  If  a  copy  of  the  report  is  simply 
filed  in, his  office,  it  is  liable  to  be  destroyed  or  mislaid,  which  may 
prove  detrimental  to  the  interests  of  the  district.  See  Forms  No.  15 
and  25,  and  notes  appended. 


or- 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  21 

SEC.  40.     Should  the  secretary  fail  to  file  his  report  as  £fl™tnrt;    £? 
above  directed,  he  shall  forfeit  the  sum  of  twenty-five  dol-  port, 
lars,  and  shall  make  good  all  losses  resulting  from  such 
failure,  and  suit,  shall  be  brought,  in  both  cases,  by  the 
district,  on  his  official  bond. 

TREASURER. 

SEC.  41.     The  treasurer  shall  hold  all  moneys  belong-  hoidSUand toPaj 
ing  to  the  district,  and  pay  out  the  same  on  the  order  of  out  moneys, 
the  president,  countersigned  by  the  secretary,  and  shall 
keep  a  correct  account  of  all  expenses  and  receipts  in  a 
book  provided  for  the  purpose. 

SEO.  42.     The  money  collected  by  district  tax,  for  the  Different  fund*. 

>;  i     /.        ,1  t>    i    i  ,     partial         pay- 

erection  of  school-houses,  and  for  the  payment  of  debts  ments   en 
contracted  for  the  same,  shall  be  called  the  "  school-house  ders< 

SEC.  40.  In  case  the  sub-directors  fail  to  make  their  annual 
reports,  as  required  by  section  49,  the  secretary  should  collect  the 
statistics  necessary  for  a  complete  report.  The  board  of  directors 
should  pay  the  secretary  a  suitable  compensation  for  his  labor.  See 
section  21. 

SEC.  41.  ( a )  The  language  of  this  section  is  very  explicit.  It 
makes  the  treasurer  the  custodian  of  all  moneys  belonging  to  the 
district,  which  effectually  precludes  the  idea  of  dividing  the  money 
belonging  to  any  particular  fund  among  the  sub-districts.  He  can 
only  pa}7  it  out  on  the  order  of  the  president,  countersigned  by  the 
secretary,  and  the  president  can  draw  no  order  unless  he  is  author- 
ized to  do  so  by  the  board  of  directors.  See  section  21,  and  notes 
on  same,  and  also  note  on  sections  34  and  37. 

(  b  )  It  is  unlawful  to  loan  moneys  belonging  to  the  district.  See 
section  4243,  Revision  1860. 

SEC.  42.  (a)  Minor  improvements,  such  as  the  erection  ol  ordi- 
nary out-houses,  fences,  etc.,  may  be  paid  from  either  the  l<  contin- 
gent fund  "  or  "  school-house  fund."  Ordinary  repairs  should  be 
charged  to  the  "  contingent  fund  "  ;  but  when  such  repairs  assume 
the  magnitude  of  a  re-building,  or  of  an  extensive  addition,  they 
should  be  charged  to  the  "  school-house  fund."  The  teachers'  fund 
must  be  used  exclusively  for  the  payment  of  teachers. 

(b)  The  impression  seems  to  be  very  general,  that  the  teachers' 
fund  is  to  be  divided  among  the  sub-districts,  in  proportion  to  the 
number  of  children.  The  law  does  not  contemplate  any  such  thing. 
All  money  belonging  to  this  fund,  whether  derived  from  the  semi- 
annual apportionments  or  district  school-tax  (the  tax  determined  by 
the  board  of  directors,  as  provided  in  section  29),  should  be  paid 
into  the  district  treasury,  as  the  common  property  of  the  district- 


22  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 

fund ; "  that  designed  for  rent,  fuel,  repairs,  and  all 
other  contingent  expenses  necessary  for  keeping  the 
schools  in  operation,  the  "contingent  fund;"  and  that 
received  for  the  payment  of  teachers,  the  "  teachers' 
fund ;  "  and  the  district  treasurer  shall  keep  with  each 
fund  a  separate  account;  and  shall  pay  no  order  which 
does  not  specify  the  fund  on  which  it  is  drawn,  and  the 
specific  use  to  which  it  is  applied.  If  he  have  not  suffi- 
cient funds  in  his  hands  to  pay  in  full  the  warrants  drawn 
on  the  fund  specified,  he  shall  make  a  partial  payment 
thereon,  paying  as  near  as  may  be,  an  equal  proportion  of 
each  warrant. 

SEC.  43.     He  shall  receive  all  moneys  apportioned  to 
TO  receive  mon-  the  district  township  by  the  clerk  of  the  board  of  super- 
Todf£?ict!onJd  visors,  and  also  all  money  collected  by  the  county  treas- 
urer on  the  district  school  tax,  levied  for  his  district 

townsJiip,  and  it  can  only  be  paid  out  upon  an  order  authorized  by 
the  board  of  directors,  and  signed  by  the  president  and  counter- 
signed by  the  secretary.  The  sub-director  employs  the  teacher, 
under  such  restrictions  as  the  board  of  directors  may  prescribe  ;  and 
when  the  board  are  satisfied  that  the  terms  of  the  contract  have 
been  complied  with,  it  is  their  duty  to  audit  and  allow  the  teacher's 
claim  for  compensation,  and  to  pay  him  by  an  order  on  the  treas- 
urer of  the  district  township.  Hence,  a  sub-district  with  twenty 
children  may  possibly  receive  as  much  money  as  one  with  forty 
children  ;  for  it  will  cost  about  as  much  to  maintain  a  school  in  the 
one  as  in  the  other.  In  this  way,  each  sub-district  will  receive  whatever 
sum  may  be  required  to  pay  the  compensation  of  tlie  teacher,  as  -fixed  by 
the  contract  made  by  the  sub-director,  and  the  law  does  not  design  that 
any  other  disposition,  or  division,  if  you  prefer  the  term,  of  the 
money  shall  be  made.  Some  districts  divide  the  money  equally 
among  the  sub-districts,  and  others  according  to  the  number  of  chil- 
dren. 'Both  these  methods  are  illegal.  The  board  of  directors 
should  fix  the  compensation  of  teachers  in  each  sub-district,  allow- 
ing such  wages  as  may  be  justified  by  the  peculiar  circumstances 
and  wants  of  each.  In  some  sub-districts  two  teachers  may  be 
required,  or  one  teacher  and  an  assistant ;  in  some,  a  first-class 
teacher  may  be  needed,  while  in  others,  where  the  children  are 
small,  a  teacher  whose  services  may  be  procured  for  a  less  compen- 
sation may  perform  successfully  all  the  duties  required.  The  design 
of  the  law  is  to  furnish,  as  far  as  possible,  equal  educational  advan- 
tages to  all  the  children  ot  the  district  township.  All  these  matters 
are  to  be  determined  by  the  board  upon  the  principles  of  equity  and 
true  economy.  See  section  41,  and  note  on  same. 
SEC.  43.  See  section  59. 


SCHOOL  IAW8  OF  IOWA.  23 

SEC.  44.     He  shall  register  all  orders  on  the  district  J°../esister  or- 
treasuiy  reported  to  him  by  the  secretary,  showing  the 
number  of  the  order,  date,  name  of  the  person  in  whose 
favor  drawn,  the  fund  on  which  it  is  drawn,  for  what  pur- 
pose, and  the  amount. 

SEC.  45,     He  shall  render  a  statement  of  the  finances  TO  render  state- 
of  the  district  from  time  to  time,  as  may  be  required  by  m 
the  board  of  directors,  and  his  books  shall  always  be  open 
for  inspection. 

SUB-DIRECTOK. 

SEC.  46.  Each  sub-director  shall,  on  or  before  the  official  oath  of 
third  Monday  in  March  following  his  election,  appear 
before  some  officer  qualified  to  administer  oaths,  and  take 
an  oath  to  support  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
and  that  of  the  state  of  Iowa,  and  that  he  will  faithfully 
discharge  the  duties  of  his  office;  and  in  case  of  failure 
so  to  qualify,  his  office  shall  be  deemed  vacant.  Any 
school  director  or  director  elect,  is  hereby  authorized  to 
administer  to  any  school  director  elect  the  official  oath 
required  by  law. 

SEC.  47"    It   shall   be   the   duty   of  the   sub-director,  f^;^™^^0 
under  such  rules  and  regulations  as  the  board  of  directors  enPand  make 
may  prescribe,  to  negotiate  and  make  in  his  sub-district repairs- 
all  necessary  contracts  for  providing  fuel  for  schools,  em- 
ploying teachers,  repairing  and  furnishing  school-houses, 
and  for  making  all  other  provisions  necessary  for  the  con- 
venience and  prosperity  of  the  schools  within   his   sub- 
district,  and  he  shall  have  the  control  and  management  of 


SEC.  44.  The  register  provided  for  in  this  section  is  indispensa- 
ble to  the  treasurer,  under  the  law  requiring  him  to  make  partial 
payments  on  orders,  when  he  has  not  funds  sufficient  to  pay  them  in 
full.  (sec.  42.)  It  is  essential  that  he  should  know  the  exact 
amount  of  outstanding  orders,  and  for  this  reason  the  secretary  is 
required  to  report  to  him  all  orders  drawn  on  the  district  treasury. 
See  sec.  34,  and  note  on  same,  and  Form  No.  12,  and  note  appended. 

SEC.  45.  Especially  should  a  full  report  of  finances  be  included 
in  the  annual  report  to  the  district  township  meeting.  Section  20. 
and  note  thereto. 

SRC.  46.  In  case  a  sub-director  fails  to  qualify,  the  vacancy  thus 
created  is  filed  by  his  predecessor,  who  holds  over  another  year.  A 
person  thus  holding  over,  should  renew  his  oath  of  office. 

SEC.  47.  In  performing  the  duties  required  of  him  by  law,  the 
sub-director  is  subject  to  any  regulations  consistent  with  law  which 


24  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

the  school-house,  unless  otherwise  ordered  by  a  vote  of 
contracts  to  be  the  district  township  meeting.     All  contracts  made  in 

approved.  «         .,  -^1-1  •   •  t*  ,  i  •  •  T     -,,    -, 

conformity  with  the  provisions  of  this  section,  shall  be 
approved  by  the  president,  and  reported  to  the  board  of 
directors,  and  said  board,  in  their  corporate  capacity,  shall 
be  responsible  for  the  performance  of  the  same  on  the 
part  of  the  district  township. 

SEC.  48.  He  shall,  between  the  first  and  tenth  days  of 
TO  register  September  of  each  year,  prepare  a  list  of  the  names  of  the 

names    of     the  -,-1-,         „    n        .-,.         Y       i  •*         i     T    ,    •  i  .  i        i 

heads  of  fami-  neads  ot  families  in  his  sub-district,  together  with  the 
number  of  children  between  the  ages  of  five  and  twenty- 
one  years,  distinguishing  males  from  females,  and  shall 
record  the  same  in  a  book  kept  for  that  purpose. 

SEC.  49.     He  shall,  between  the  tenth  and  fifteenth 

TO  make  annual  days  of  September  of  each  year,  report  to  the  secretary 

of  the  district  township  the  number  of  persons  in  his 

sub-district  between   the   ages   of  five   and   twenty-one 

years,  distinguishing  males  from  females. 

SEC.  50.  He  shall  have  power,  with  the  concurrence 
May  dismiss  of  the  president  of  the  board  of  directors,  to  dismiss  any 
pupils.  pupil  from  the  schools  in  his  sub-district,for  gross  immor- 

ality, or  for  persistent  violation  of  the  regulations  of  the 
school ;  and  to  re-admit  them,  if  he  deems  proper  so  to 
do ;  and  shall  visit  the  schools  in  his  sub-district  at  least 
twice  during  each  term  of  said  school. 

SEC.  51.     All    contracts   with   teachers    shall    be    in 

contracts  with  writing,  specifying  the  length  of  time  the  school  is  to  be 

teachers  to  be  taught,  in  weeks;  the  compensation   per   week,  or  per 

month  of  four  weeks ;  and  such  other  matters  as  may  be 

the  board  may  prescribe.  See  sections  8, 11,  22,  30,  and  the  notes 
thereto.  The  sub-director  can  receive  no  compensation  for  services, 
section  31. 

SEC.  49.  The  failure  of  the  sub-directors  to  make  their  reports,  as, 
required  by  this  section,  will  deprive  the  district  township  of  its 
proportion  of  school-money.  See  also,  section  48. 

SEC.  50.  The  visiting  of  schools  prescribed  by  section  22,  and  by 
this  section,  should  be  conscientiously  performed.  The  power  to 
dismiss  teachers  (22)  and  pupils  (50)  should  be  judiciously  exercised. 
WhUe  the  interests  of  the  schools  must  not  on  any  account  be  jeop- 
ardized, great  care  should  be  taken  not  to  treat  individuals  with  in- 
justice. 

SEC.  51.  Contracts  with  teachers,  and  all  other  contracts  made  by 
the  sub-director,  must  be  filed  with  aud  approved  by  the  president, 
if  correct,  and  reported  to  the  board  of  directors.  Section 
47.  A  contract  made  by  a  sub-director  who  is  president,  should 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  25 

agreed  upon ;  and  shall  be  signed  by  the  sub-director  and 
teacher,  and  be  approved  by  and  filed  with  the  president 
before  the  teacher  enters  upon  the  discharge  of  his 
duties. 

BOARD    OF     SUPERVISORS. 

SEC.  52.     The  board  of   supervisors  of  each  county,  county   school 

-,     n       ,    ,1        ,.  n.  i         .         ,Tr  /.  •>  7  tax  to  be  levied. 

shall  at  me  time  ot  levying  the  tax  lor  county  purposes, 
levy  a  tax  for  the  support  of  schools  within  the  county, 
of  not  less  than  one  mill,  nor  more  than  two  and  one- 
half  mills  on  the  dollar,  on  the  assessed  value  of  all  the 
real  and  personal  property  within  the  county,  which  shall 
be  collected  by  the  county  treasurer,  at  the  time,  and  in 
the  same  manner  as  state  and  county  taxes  are  collected, 
except  that  it  shall  be  receivable  only  in  cash. 

SEO.  53.     They  shall  also  levy  at  the  same  time,  the  District  school 
district  school  tax  certified  to  them,  from  time  to  time  by  ta 
the  respective  district  secretaries. 

SEC.  54.     All  taxes  hereafter  voted  and  levied  under  specific    sums 
the  provisions  of  chapter  172,  laws  of  the  Ninth  General  £choo!Siouse?or 
Assembly,   and  the   acts   amendatory  thereto,  shall  be  coSngent  fSSa 
after  the  following  manner,  to- wit:  Each  school-district to  bo  voted- 
township  and  independent  school-district,  shall  vote  the 
several  specific  sums  of  money  deemed  by  them  neces- 
sary to  be  raised  for  school-house  fund,  teachers'  fund, 
and   contingent  fund,   respectively   in    their    respective 
school-districts,  at  the   same  time  as  now  provided  by 


be  submitted  to  the  board  for  approval.  Teachers'  contracts 
do  not  require  a  revenue  stamp.  Section  61  prohibits  the  employ- 
ment of  a  teacher  who  has  not  a  certificate.  The  certificate  should 
be  produced  before  the  contract  is  signed. 

SEC.  54.  (a.)  Under  the  provisions  of  this  section,  the  electors 
at  the  sub-district,  district  township,  and  independent  district  meet- 
ings, vote  the  specific  sums  deemed  necessary  for  school-house  fund  ; 
these  amounts  are  to  be  apportioned  among  the  sub-districts  by  the 
board  of  directors,  who  also,  determine,  under  the  provisions  of 
section  29,  the  sums  of  money  deemed  necessary  for  teachers'  and 
contingent  fund ;  all  of  which  sums  are  to  be  certified  by  the  secre- 
taries to  the  board  of  supervisors,  whose  duty  it  is  to  determine  the 
per  centum  necessary  to  raise  the  several  amounts  certified. 

(&.)  The  limit  alluded  to  in  the  first  part  of  the  proviso  to  this  sec- 
tion is  found  in  sections  7,  12,  28,  and  103.  The  rate  can  in  no  case 
exceed  fifteen  mills  on  the  dollar  OD  the  property  of  any  sub-district 
Si 


26  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

law,  and  the  secretary  of  each  district  township,  or  inde- 
secretary  to  cer- pendent  school-district,  shall  certify  the  several  sums  so 
board  ^nfupe?  voted  to  the  board  of  supervisors,  designating  the  amount 
of  school-house  tax  to  be  levied  in  each  sub-district,  who, 
in  levying  the  said  taxes,  shall  determine  and  fix  as  near 
as  may  be,  the  per  centum  necessary  to  be  levied  upon 
the  property  of  each  sub-district,  township,  or  independ- 
ent school-district,  in  order  to  realize  ^he  respective  sums 
so  certified,  due   regard  being  had  in  all  cases,  to  the 
proper    apportionment   of   the    school-house    fund    tax, 
between  the  several  sub-districts  of  any  district  township 
as  now  provided  by  law.     Provided,  always,  That  the 
per  centum  so  levied  shall  in  no  case  exceed  the  limit 
now  fixed  by  law,  but  in  case  the  board  of  supervisors 
ascertain  that  the  specific  sum  certified  is  greater  than 
the  maximum  per  centum  now  authorized  will  produce, 
the  board  shall  nevertheless  levy  such  maximum  limit; 
contingent       and  the   amount  raised   for   contingent  fund  shall  not 
i^pe/schoiar*-  exceed  five  dollars  per  scholar,  and  the  amount  raised  for 
foac$i5Sperimd  teachers'  fund,  including  the  amount  received  from  the 
scholar.  semi-annual  apportionment,  shall  not  exceed  fifteen  dol- 

lars per  scholar,  for  each  scholar  residing  in  the  district 
township,  or  independent  district  for  which  the  tax  is 
levied.     The  number  of  persons  between  the  ages  of  five 
and  twenty-one  years,  as  shown  by  the  last  report  of  the 
county  superintendent,  shall  for  the  purposes  of  this  act, 
be  deemed  the  number  of  scholars  in  each  school-district. 
SEO.  55.     The  board  of  supervisors  shall,  at  the  time 
Ssors  toreXce  of  levying  the  taxes  for  teachers'  and  contingent  fund,  cer- 
case  of  excess10  ^fied  under  section  29,  ascertain  whether  the  amount  so 
certified  exceeds  the  limitation  in  the  preceding  section, 
and  in  case  of  any  excess,  they  shall  reduce  the   per 
centum  of  tax  levied,  until  the  amount  shall  come  within 
said  limitation. 

SEO.  56.  The  boundary  lines  of  no  civil  township 
shall  be  changed  by  the  board  of  supervisors  of  any 
county,  so  as  to  divide  any  school  district  or  sub-district 


for  school-house  fund,  nor  can  the  aggregate  of  the  sums  levied  for 
this  purpose  on  the  respective  sub-districts  exceed  ten  mills  on  the 
dollar  in  any  one  year  on  the  property  of  the  district  township. 

SEC.  56.  The  object  of  this  section  is  to  prevent  such  changes  in 
the  boundaries  of  civil  townships  as  will  divide  sub-districts.  Under 
its  provisions  such  changes  can  only  be  made,  first,  upon  the  petition 
a  majority  of  the  voters  of  the  sub-district  to  be  divided ;  second, 
where  changes  are  made  conforming  to  the  lines  of  congressional 
townships. 


SCHOOL  IAWS   OF  IOWA.  27 


by  changing  the  boundary  lines  thereof,  except  when  a  *|j 
majority  of  the  voters  of  such  district  or  sub-district  shall  vide  "sub-dis- 
petition  therefor.  Provided,  however,  that  this  act  shall  onCcongreeseion- 
not  prevent  the  change  of  the  boundary  lines  of  any  civil  JouuT" 
township,  when  such  change  is  made  by  adopting  the 
lines  of  congressional  townships. 

COUNTY    AUDITOK. 

SEC.  57.  The  clerk  of  the  board  of  supervisors  shall, 
on  the  first  Monday  in  April  and  fourth  Monday  in  Sep- 
tember of  each  year,  apportion  the  county  school-tax,  fjjjjj^s  die~ 
together  with  the  interest  on  the  permanent  school-fund 
to  which  his  county  is  entitled,  and  all  other  money  in 
the  hands  of  the  county  treasurer  belonging  in  common 
to  the  schools  of  his  county,  and  not  included  in  any  pre- 
vious apportionment,  among  the  several  school-districts 
therein,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  persons  between 
five  and  twenty -one  years  of  age,  as  shown  by  the  report 
of  the  county  superintendent  filed  with  him  for  the  year 
immediately  preceding,  which  report,  showing  the  number 
of  persons  between  the  ages  of  five  and  twenty-one  years, 
in  each  school-district  in  the  county,  shall  be  so  filed  on 
the  fifth  day  of  October  annually. 

SEC.  58.     He  shall  forward  to  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction,  a  certificate  of  the  election  or  appoint- 
ment and  qualification  of  the  county  superintendent;  and  StuS^Buperfn 
shall   also,   on  the   second  Monday    in   February    and  teo^ ?jje^dt  re 

auditor  of  state 

SEC.  57.  A  provision  of  the  law  of  1858,  which  required  one- 
half  of  these  funds  to  be  equally  divided  among  the  school-districts 
of  the  county,  and  the  other  moiety  according  to  the  number  of 
youth,  was  declared  to  be  in  conflict  with  the  constitution.  The 
District  Township  of  the  City  of  Dubuque  v.  The  County  Judge  of 
Dubuque  County,  XIII  Iowa,  250. 

SEC.  58.  It  is  important  that  the  certificate  referred  to  should  be 
promptly  forwarded  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 
Otherwise,  the  interests  of  the  county  may  suffer  by  the  transaction 
of  business  with  persons  not  duly  authorized  to  act.  The  certificate 
should  in  all  cases  certify  to  the  qualification  as  well  as  the  election 
or  appointment  of  the  county  superintendent ;  for  although  he  may 
be  properly  elected  or  appointed,  yet  he  can  not  be  recognized  until 
it  is  known  that  he  has  taken  the  necessary  oath  of  ofiice.  When- 
ever any  change  is  made  by  resignation  or  otherwise,  a  certificate  of 
the  appointment  of  a  successor  should  be  immediately  forwarded. 


28  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

August  of  each  year,  make  out  and  transmit  to  the  audi- 
tor of  state,  in  accordance  with  such  form  as  the  said 
auditor  may  prescribe,  a  report  of  the  interest  of  the 
school-fund  then  in  the  hands  of  the  county  treasurer,  and 
not  included  in  any  previous  apportionment ;  and  also 
the  amount  of  said  interest  remaining  unpaid. 

COUNTY    TREASURER. 

SEC.  59.     The  county  treasurer  shall,  on  the  first  Mon- 
county    treas  day  in  April,  of  each  year,  pay  over  to  the  treasurer  of 
tal,rIndarendeJ  the  district  the  amount  of  all  school  district  tax  which 
statement.        shall  have  been  collected,  and  shall  render  him  a  state- 
ment of  the  amount  uncollected  ;  and  shall  pay  over  the 
amount  in  his  hands  quarterly  thereafter.      He  shall  also 
keep  the  amount  of  tax  levied  for  school-house  purposes 
separate  in  each  sub-district,  where  such  levy  has  been 
made  directly  upon  the  property  of  the  sub-district  making 
the  application,  and  shall  pay  over  the  same  quarterly  to 
the  township  treasurer,  for  the  benefit  of  such  sub-district 
accountsepawith  ^Q  shall,  in  all  counties  wherein  independent  school-dis- 
sehooi-Sricts tr^8  are  °rganized,  keep  a  separate  account  with  said 
and°°payS  over  independent  school-districts,  in  which  the  receipts  shall 
be  daily  entered,  which  books  shall  at  all  times  be  open 
to  the  inspection  and  examination  of  the  district  board  of 
directors,  and  shall  pay  over  to   the   said  independent 
school-districts  the  amount  of  school  taxes  in  his  posses- 
sion, on  the  order  of  the  board,  on  the  first  day  of  each  and 
every  month. 

SEC.  60.     On  the  first  day  of  each  quarter,  the  county 
shall  render  a  treasurer  shall  give  notice  to  the  president  of  the  school 

statement  quar-  ^^  of  each  fo^ghjp  jn  ftg  county,  of  the    amount  COl- 

lected  for  each  fund;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  presi- 
dent of  each  board  to  draw  his  warrant,  countersigned  by 
the  secretary,  upon  the  county  treasurer  for  such  amount, 
Pay  over  funds  who  shall  pay  the  amount  of  s*ich  taxes  to  the  treasurers 
ran?.   *        ""  of  the  several  school  boards  only  on  such  warrants. 

TEACHERS. 

SEC.  61.     No  person  shall  be  employed  to  teach  a  com- 
mon school  which  is  to  receive  its  distributive  share  of  the 


SEC.  61.  (a)  The  only  legal  certificates,  besides  those  given  by 
county  superintendents,  are  the  perpetual  state  certificates  issued 
by  the  board  of  educational  examiners,  for  which  see  sec.  138,  etc. 

(6)    The  teacher  must  have  a  certificate  during  the  whole  term 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  29 

school  fund,  unless  lie  shall  have  a  certificate  of  qualifica-  NO  teacher  to 
tion  signed  by  the  county  superintendent  of  the  county  wlthoutmcerdfi- 
in  which  the  school  is  situated,  or  by  some  other  officer  cate- 
duly  authorized  by  law;  and  any  teacher  who  commences 
teaching  without  such  certificate,  shall  forfeit  all  claim  to 
compensation  for  the  time  during  which  he  teaches  with- 
out such  certificate. 

SEC.  62.     The  teacher  shall  keep  a  correct  register  of  Teacher  to  keep 
the  school,  which  shall  exhibit  the  sub-district,  township, re 
county,  and  state,  in  which  the  school  is  kept;  the  day  of 
the  week,  the  month  and  year;  the  name,  age,  and  attend- 
ance of  each  scholar,  and   the  branches  taught.     When 
scholars  reside  in  different  districts,  a  register  shall  be 
kept  for  each  district. 

of  school  ;  the  law  is  imperative  on  this  point.  A  person  is  not 
authorized  to  teach  a  single  day  beyond  the  period  named  in  his 
certificate. 

( c )  A  teacher  who  by  his  contract  is  authorized  or  required  to 
employ  his  assistants,  can  employ  only  those  who  have  certificates. 
But  the  law  does  not  contemplate  that  teachers  shall  be  employed 
except  by  the  directors.  Even  in  case  of  a  teacher's  temporary  ab- 
sence from  sickness  or  any  other  cause,  the  place  should  be  supplied 
with  some  duly  qualified  person  selected  by  the  directors. 

( d  )  In  case  a  person  is  employed  or  continued  as  a  teacher  in 
violation  of  law  without  a  certificate,  a  resident  elector  of  the  town- 
ship district  may  sue  out  a  writ  of  injunction,  restraining  the  person 
from  teaching  and  the  district  from  paying.  Such  a  writ  can  not  be 
served  at  the  instance  of  the  county  superintendent,  XYII  Iowa,  228. 

Boards  of  directors  employing  and  paying  such  teachers  are  liable 
to  prosecution  under  the  provisions  of  the  general  statutes  for  mis- 
application of  funds.  See  sections  4301,  4302,  4303,' Revision  of  1860. 

SEC.  62.  The  teacher  may  be  held  responsible  to  the  board,  for 
the  efficient  discharge  of  every  duty  properly  attaching  to  the  office 
of  teacher,  including  the  oversight  and  preservation  of  "hool 
buildings,  grounds,  furniture,  apparatus,  and  other  school  pr  ;>erty, 
as  well  as  the  more  prominent  work  of  instruction  and  government. 
Such  labor,  however,  as  sawing  wood,  making  fires,  and  sweeping 
the  school-house,  is  no  appropriate  part  of  a  teacher's  duty ;  and 
its  performance  by  the  teacher  can  not  be  legally  enforced  by  the 
board,  unless  the  teacher  has  voluntarily  stipulated  to  do  it.  The 
cost  of  this  work  is  properly  chargeable  to  the  "contingent  fund," 
and  in  all  well  regulated  districts  and  schools  this  course  is  pursued. 
If  teachers  voluntarily  assume  these  duties  as  a  matter  of  conveni- 
ence and  economy  to  the  district,  it  is  all  very  well. 

For  other  provisions  relating  to  teachers  see  sections  22,  51,  64, 
65,81,  82,  and  notes  thereto. 


gO  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

SEC.  63,     The  teacher   shall    immediately   after    the 
TO  me  copy  of  close  of  his  school,  file  in  the  office  of  the  secretary  of  the 
board  of  directors,  a  certified  copy  of  the  register  afore- 
said. 

COUNTY    SUPERINTENDENT. 

SEC.  64.  On  the  last  Saturday  of  each  month  the 
TO  meet  and  county  superintendent  shall  meet  all  persons  desirous  of 
examine  teach-  passjng  an  examination,  and  for  the  transaction  of  any 
other  business  within  his  jurisdiction,  in  some  suitable 
room  provided  for  that  purpose  by  the  board  of  supervisors 
at  the  county  seat,  at  which  time  he  shall  examine  all 
such  applicants  for  examination  as  to  their  competency 
and  ability  to  teach  orthography,  reading,  writing,  arith- 
metic, geography  and  English  grammar  and  history  of 
the  United  States;  and  in  making  such  examination,  he 
may,  at  his  option,  call  to  his  aid  one  or  more  assistants. 

SEC.  65.     If  the  examination   is   satisfactory,  and  the 
TO    issue  cer-  superintendent  is  satisfied  that  the  respective  applicants 
possess  a  good  moral   character,  and  the  essential  qualifi- 
cations for  governing  and  instructing  children  and  youth, 


SEC.  63.  A  correct  copy  of  the  teacher's  register  is  usually  indis- 
pensable to  the  proper  discharge  of  the  secretary's  duties  ;  hence 
the  secretary  of  the  district  may  refuse  to  sign  an  order  for  teacher's 
wages,  until  the  register  is  filed  in  his  office  as  required  by  this 
section. 

SEC.  64.  The  law  does  not  authorize  the  appointment  of  a  deputy 
county  superintendent,  except  for  the  examination  of  teachers  and 
even  in  that  case  the  certificate  must  be  given  by  the  superintendent 
himself,  (sec.  68.)  In  case  of  temporary  absence  from  the  county, 
or  of  sickness,  the  superintendent  may  authorize  another  person  to 
discharge  specific  duties,  such  as  examining  teachers,  or  making 
reports ;  but  he  cannot  delegate  authority  to  try  appeals  or  visit 
schools. 

SEC.  65.  (a).  County  superintendents  should  remember  that 
they  are  to  inquire,  not  only  into  the  applicant's  literary  qualifica- 
tion, but  they  must  also  be  "  satisfied  that  the  applicants  possess  & 
good  moral  character,  and  the  essential  qualifications  for  governing 
and  instructing  children  and  youth."  Scholarship,  moral  character, 
ability  to  govern,  aptness  to  feaefc,— the  law  requires  all  four  of  these 
qualifications  in  those  to  whom  are  intrusted  the  highest  interests 
of  the  state-  the  education  of  its  youth. 

(5)  There  is  no  legal  incompatibility  between  the  office  of 
teacher  and  that  of  county  superintendent.  And  as  the  law  (section 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  31 

he  shall  give  them   a  certificate  to  that  effect,  for  a  term 
not  exceeding  one  year. 

SEC.  66.     Any  school  officer  or  other  person  shall  be  J^^J0^ 
permitted  to  be  present  at  such  examination ;  and  the  su-  names   record- 
perintenclent  shall  make  a  record  of  the  name,  residence, ed' 
age,  and  date  of  examination  of  all  persons  so  examined, 
distinguishing  between  those  to  whom  he  issues  certifi- 
cates, and  those  rejected. 

SEC.  67.     If  any  person  shall  make  application  for  an  Applicants    to 

J   F  i         i     11   ^        ±1  •       pay  a  fee  of  one 

examination  at  any  other  time,  he  shall  pay  the  superin-  dollar, 
tendent  a  fee  of  one  dollar  before  the  examination  is  com- 
menced, as  a  compensation  therefor;  unless  he  presented 
himself  on  the  regular  day  specified,  and  was  unable  from 
no  fault  of  his  own  to  obtain  an  examination,  in  which 
case  no  fee  shall  be  required  of  him.  t 

SEC.  68.     If  for  any  cause  the  county  superintendent  May     appoint 
cannot  be  present  at  the  regular  day  thus  fixed,  he  shall  e 
appoint  one  or  more  deputies  to  make  the  examination  in 
his  stead.     He  shall  afterwards  issue  certificates  to  those 
who  receive    the    recommendation  of  his    deputies   as 
aforesaid. 

SEC.  69.  The  superintendent  may  revoke  the  certifi- 
cate  of  any  teacher  in  the  county,  which  was  given  by  the 
superintendent  thereof,  for  any  reason  which  would  have 


61)  requires  every  teacher  employed  in  the  public  schools  to  have 
a  certificate,  and  as  the  county  superintendent  is  the  only  authority, 
except  the  state  board  of  examiners,  (section  138),  that  can  grant 
certificates,  if  the  county  superintendent  has  not  a  state  certificate, 
he  may  as  a  matter  of  form  issue  a  certificate  to  himself. 

(c)  No  person  is  entitled  to  a  certificate  unless  he  is  able  to 
instruct  a  school  in  all  the  branches  required  by  law  in  English. 
See  section  83,  and  note  (e)  to  section  76. 

(d)  A  certificate  may,  in  the  discretion  of  the  county  superinten- 
dent, be  given  for  a  less  peried  than  one  year. 

SEC.  67.  The  courts  have  decided  that  the  "  one  dollar  "  men- 
tioned in  this  section,  is  the  full  compensation  to  which  superinten- 
dents are  entitled  for  individual  examinations.  For- the  examination 
of  those  referred  to  in  the  latter  part  of  the  section,  of  whom  "  no 
fee  shall  be  required,"  the  superintendent  is  entitled  to  his  usual 
psr  diem. 

SEC.  68.    See  note  to  section  64. 

SEC.  69.    See  section  81  and  note  thereto. 

Though  an  appeal  will  lie  in  such  cases,  the  discretion  of  a  county 
superinteudent  in  refusing  or  revoking  a  teacher's  certificate  will 
not  be  interfered  with  by  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction, 


32  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

justified  the  withholding  thereof  when  the  same  was 
given,  after  an  investigation  of  facts  in  the  case  of  which 
investigation  the  teacher  shall  have  personal  notice,  and 
he  shall  be  permitted  to  be  present  and  make  his  defense. 
SEC.  70.  On  the  fifth  day  of  October  of  each  year  he  shall 
annn-  make  a  repoi  t  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction, 
containing  an  abstract  of  the  reports  made  to  him  by  the 
respective  district  secretaries,  and  such  other  matters  as 
he  shall  be  directed  to  report  by  said  superintendent,  and 
as  he  himself  may  deem  essential  in  exhibiting  the  true 
condition  of  the  schools  under  his  charge ;  and  he  shall  at 
the  same  time  file  with  the  clerk  of  the  board  of  supervi- 
sors a  statement  of  the  number  of  persons  between  the 
ages  of  five  and  twenty-one  years,  in  each  school-district 
in  his  county. 

SEC.  71.     Should  he  fail  to  make  either  of  the   reports 
porture  to  re"  required  in  the  last  section,  he  shall  forfeit  to  the   school 
fund  of  his  county  the  sum  of  fifty  dollars,  and  shall   be- 
sides, be  liable  for  all  damages  caused  by  such  neglect. 

SEO.  72.     He  shall,  at   all  times,  conform  to   the  in- 
TO  conform  to  structions  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  as 
andtmctransmit  to  matters  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  said  superintend- 
SSt  officers0  ent-     He  shall  serve  as  the  organ  of  communication   be- 
tween the  superintendent  and  township  or  district  author- 
ities.    He  shall  transmit  to   the  townships,  districts   or 
teachers,  all  blanks,  circulars,  and  other  communications, 
which  are  to  them  directed. 


unless  it  is  clearly  shown  that  in  such  act,  the  county  superinten- 
dent violated  law  or  abused  his  discretion.  See  opinion  of  attorney- 
general  in  the  School  Journal  for  June,  1867,  p.  212  ;  also  the  case  of 
Dougherty  v.  Tracy,  an  appeal  from  Grundy  county,  in  the  Softool 
Journal  for  October  1867,  p.  26. 

SEC.  70.  (a)  Superintendents  may  often  increase  the  accuracy  of 
their  reports  by  comparing  some  of  the  items  of  secretaries'  reports 
with  the  books  of  the  couuty  treasurer.  This  remark  applies  espe- 
cially to  the  amounts  apportioned  on  the  first  Monday  of  April  and 
the  fourth  Monday  of  September,  by  the  clerk  of  the  board  of  super- 
visors. 

(b)  Should  the  county  superintendent  foil  to  make  the  reports 
required  by  this  section,  the  county  will  forfeit  its  proportion  of  the 
income  of  the  permanent  school  fund,  and  the  superintendent  wi. 
be  liable  to  the  penalties  enumerated  in  section  71. 

(c)  Should   the  district  secretaries  fail  to  make  their  reports  in 
time,  the  superintendent  should  take  prompt  measures  to  secure 
them,  even  go  after  them  in  person  if  necessary. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  33 

SEC.  73.     It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  county   superin-  Report  to  super- 
tendent  to  report  on  the  first  day   of  November  of  each  gtitnttonforthe 
year  to  the  superintendent  of  the  Iowa  institution  for  the  blind- 
blind,  the  name,  age,  residence,  and  post-office  address  of 
every  blind  person  and  every  person  blind  to  such  an  ex- 
tent as  to  be  unable  to  acquire  an  education  in    the   com- 
mon schools  and  who  resides  in  the  county  in  which  he  is 
superintendent. 

SEC.  74.     It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  county  superin-  Report  to  super- 
tendent  to  report  on  the  first   day  of  November   of  each  smuttoSVoJ t'he 
year  to  the  superintendent  of  the  Iowa  institution  for  the  deaf  and  dumb- 
deaf  and  dumb  the  name,  age  and  post-office   address   of 
every  deaf  and  dumb  person    between   the   ages  of  five 
and  twenty-one,  who  resides  in  the  county  in  which  he  is 
superintendent,  including  all  such  persons  as  may  be  deaf 
to  such  an  extent  as  to  be  unable  to  acquire  an  education 
in  the  common  schools.     It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  sec- 
retary of  each  school  district  to  furnish  the   information 
above   required  with  his  annual  report  to  the  county   su- 
perintendent. 

SEC.  75.     For  the  time  necessarily   spent   in   the   dis-  compensation, 
charge  of  his  official  duties   he  shall   receive  the   sum  of 
three  dollars  per  day,  to  be  paid  from  the  county  revenue: 

SEC.  75.  (a)  It  may  not  be  practicable  in  some  counties  for  the 
superintendent  to  visit  every  school  each  term.  After  visiting  them 
once,  and  there  is  not  time  to  visit  them  all  again,  he  should  deter- 
mine where  his  visits  will  probably  do  the  most  good,  and  divide  his 
time  accordingly.  The  law  does  not  limit  the  superintendent  to  one 
visit  each  term. 

(6)  County  superintendents  are  undoubtedly  entitled  to  pay  for 
attending  teachers'  institutes.  The  law  provides  for  holding  such 
institutes,  and  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  superintendent  to  attend  to 
the  preliminary  arrangements.  The  superintendent  is  expected  to 
render  such  aid  in  conducting  the  institute  as  he  may  be  able  to 
give.  When  he  is  designated  as  the  one  to  conduct  the  institute  or 
to  lecture,  of  course  he  will  be  paid  out  of  the  appropriation  from 
the  state  ;  but  when  he  attends  to  examine  teachers,  and  to  aid 
generally,  he  should  be  paid  by  the  county. 

(c)  If  superintendents  devote  ten  or  even  fourteen  hours  of  the 
twenty-four  to  official  labor,  they  can  charge  for  but  one  day.  On 
the  other  hand  the  law  recognizes  no  fractious  ;  or,  in  other  words, 
every  fraction  of  a  day  in  which  superintendents  are  necessarily 
engaged  in  the  discharge  of  official  duties,  is  to  be  rated  as  a  full 
day.  This  position  has  been  maintained  by  some  of  our  courts. 
s5 


34  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

visit  schools,  provided  that  lie  shall  visit  each  school  in  his  county  at 
least  once  in  each  term,  and  shall  spend  at  least  one-half 
day  in  each  visit;  and  he  shall  be  entitled  to  such  addi- 
tional compensation  as  the  board  of  supervisors  may  al- 
low; provided  further,  that  he  shall  file  a  sworn  statement 
of  the  time  he  has  been  employed  in  his  official  duties 
with  the  clerk  of  the  board  of  supervisors,  before  he  shall 
be  entitled  to  any  compensation. 

GENERAL    PROVISIONS. 

SEC.  76.     In   each   sub-district  there  shall  be  taught 
one  or  more  schools  for  the  instruction  of  youth,  between 

(d)  When  a  county  superintendent  is  present  at  the  appointed 
place    on  the  last  Saturday  of  the  month  for  the  examination  of 
teachers,  he  is  entitled  to  his  per  diem,  even  if  no  one  appears  for 
examination.    In  visiting  schools,  the  time  spent  in  necessary  travel 
may  properly  be  counted  as  part  of  the  "  day  "  for  which  he  is  en- 
titled to  receive  compensation. 

(e)  Trouble  has  sometimes  arisen  between  county  superintend- 
ents and   boards  of  supervisors  in  regard  to  the  auditing  of  their 
accounts  for  services  rendered.      Supervisors  sometimes  claim  the 
privilege  of  revising  and  reducing  the  sworn  accounts  of  superin- 
tendents.   For  this  we  find  no  warrant  of  law.    The  statute  defines 
superintendents'  duties,  and  provides  that  "  for  the  time  necessarily 
spent  in  their  discharge,  he  shall  receive  the  sum  of  three  dollars 
per  day,  to  be  paid  from  the  county  revenue,"  and  such  additional 
compensation  as  the  board  of  supervisors  may  allow.     In  our  opin- 
ion, the  county  superintendent  is  the  judge  of  the  amount  of  time 
necessary  to  properly  discharge  the  duties  which  the  law  imposes. 
He  has  taken  a  solemn  oath  to  discharge  these  duties  with  fidelity  ; 
and  the  law  clothes  him  with  a  large  discretion,  while  it  gives  the 
board  of   supervisors  no  power  to  restrict.      The  superintendent 
may  err  in  judgment,  but  if  he  errs  honestly  he  is  not  amenable  to 
the  board.      The  law  requires  the  superintendent  to  file  a  sworn 
statement  with  the  clerk  of  the  board,  of  the  time  he  has  been  em- 
ployed in  the  discharge  of  his  official  duties,  and  this  is  to  the  board 
legal  evidence  ot  service.      If  he  swears  falsely,  or  commits  fraud, 
he  may  be  removed  from  office,  and  otherwise  punished;   but  as 
long  as  no  fraud  is  alleged,  the  board  of  supervisors  have  no  right 
to  sit  in  judgment  on  his  account,  nor  to  modify  it,  except  to  in- 
crease the  allowance  as  provided  by  this  section.    The  salary  should 
be  as  promptly  audited  and  paid  as  if  it  were  so  many  dollars  per 
month  or  per  annum. 

SEC,  76.    (a)    The  requirements  of  this  section  are  imperative  - 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OP  IOWA.  35 


the  ages  of  five  and  twenty-one  years,  for  at  least  twenty-  f^ugh'1  * 
four  weeks,  of  five  school  days  each,  in  each  year,  unless  wee^ 
the  county  superintendent  shall  be  satisfied  that  there  is 
good   and  sufficient   cause  for  failure   so   to   do.      Any 
person  who  was  in  the  military  service  of  the  United 
States  during  his  minority  shall   be  admitted   into   the 
schools  in  the  sub-district  in  which  he  may  reside,  on  the  schools? 


a  school  shall  be  taught  in  each  sub-district,  but  if  the  county  super- 
intendent is  fully  satisfied,  after  a  careful  investigation  of  the  facts, 
that  it  is  utterly  impracticable  to  have  a  school,  he  may  release  the 
board  of  directors  from  their  obligation  to  establish  one.  If  the 
sub-district  is  large,  the  board  of  directors  may  establisli  such 
number  of  schools,  in  different  localities,  as  they  may  consider  nec- 
essary for  the  accommodation  of  the  children. 

(b)  Under  section  16  the  board  of  directors  have  power  to  pro- 
vide for  a  longer  period  of  school  than  twenty-four  weeks ;  but  this 
increase  of  time  must  apply  alike  to  all  ot  the  sub-districts,  except 
in  cases  where  a  sub-district  makes  provision  for  further  increase  of 
time,  as  contemplated  in  section  29. 

(c)  All  the  youth  of  the  state  from  five  to  twentv-one  years  of 
age,  irrespective  of  religion,  race,  or  nationality,  are  entitled  to  the 
same  school  facilities.      AVhile  schools  may  be  graded  according  to 
the  proficiency  of  pupils,  no  discrimination  based  on  color,  such  for 
instance  as  requiring  colored  pupils  to  attend  separate  schools,  can 
be  enforced.      Clark  v.  The  Independent  District  of  Muscatine,  xxiv. 
Iowa,  266. 

(d)  Persons  over  twenty-one  years  of  age  are  not  entitled  to  the 
benefits  of  the  public  school,  except  as  provided  in  the  latter  part 
of  this  section.    If,  however,  the  school  is  not  full,  they  may  be 
admitted,  in  the  discretion  of  the  board,  upon  such  equitable  terms 
as  the    board  may  prescribe.      Children  under  five  years  of  age 
will  be  more  injured  by  the  confiaement,  than  benefitted  by  the 
instruction.      They  can   not  legally  claim   the   advantages  of  the 
school,  and  should  not  be  admitted. 

(e)  The  law  imperatively  requires  that  the  instruction  given  in  our 
public  schools  shall  be  the  English  language,   (section  83.)    Neither 
German  nor  any  other  foreign  language  can  be  taught  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  the  English.    The  interests  of  the  state  require  that  all  its 
citizens  should  be  familiar  with  the  language  in  which  our  state 
and  national  laws  are  printed,  and  in  which  our  public  records  are 
preserved.    The  strength  of  a  government  is  its  unity.     One  great 
object  of  the  school  system  of  Iowa  is  to  coalesce  and  unite  its 
citizens  of   various  nationalities  into  one  harmonious  whole — to 
Americanize  them. 


36  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 

same  terms  on  which  youths  between  the  ages  of  live  and 

twenty-one  are  admitted. 

SEC.  77.  Children  residing  in  one  district  township 
children  resid-  may  attend  school  in  another,  in  the  same  or  adjoining 
Jrilt^townsMp  county,  on  such  terms  as  may  be  agreed  upon  by  the 
may  attend  respective  boards  of  directors  of  the  district  townships 

school     in    an-  •    ,  L    j    -i      ,     •  -t  .  -i         -,  * 

other.  interested,  but,  in  case  no  such  agreement  is  made,  they 

may  attend  school  in  such  adjoining  district  township, 
with  the  consent  of  the  board  of  directors  thereof,  when 
they  reside  nearer  to  the  school  in  said  district  township 
than  to  any  school  in  their  own  district  township. 
The  board  of  directors  of  the  township  in  which  the 
children  reside  shall  be  notified  in  writing,  and  the  district 
township  in  which  they  reside,  shall  pay  to  the  district  in 
which  they  attend  school  the  average  tuition  of  said 
children  per  week,  and  an  average  proportion  of  the  con- 
tingent expenses  of  the  sub-district  where  they  attend 
school,  and  in  case  of  refusal  so  to  do,  the  secretary  shall 
file  the  account  for  said  tuition  and  contingent  expenses, 
certified  to  by  the  president,  with  the  clerk  of  the  board 
of  supervisors  of  the  county  in  which  said  children  reside, 
who  shall,  at  the  time  of  making  the  next  semi-annual 
TO  pay  average  apportionment  thereafter,  deduct  the  amount  from  the 
tfngeTt^expTn-  sum  apportioned  to  the  district  township  in  which  said 
ses-  children  reside,  and  pay  it  over  to  the  district  township  in 

which  they  have  attended  school. 

SEC.  78.  Pupils  who  are  actual  residents  of  a  district 
Terms  of  ad-  township,  shall  "Be  permitted  to  attend  school  in  the  same, 
School  in*  dis-  regardless  of  the  time  when  they  acquired  such  residence, 

trict  township. 

SEC.  77.  (a)  The  design  of  the  law  is  to  give  every  family, 
regardless  of  locality,  equal  advantages  as  far  as  possible  ;  and  this 
section  is  designed  for  the  relief  of  persons  residing  near  township 
lines,  and  too  remote  from  the  school-house  in  the  sub-distiict  in 
which  they  reside  to  be  accommodated.  The  application  should 
first  be  made  to  both  boards  of  directors,  and  in  case  they  refuse  to 
make  any  joint  arrangement,  then  it  may  be  made  to  the  board  of 
directors  of  the  district  township  in  which  the  school  to  which  the 
applicant  desires  to  send  his  children,  is  situated. 

(  b )  The  law  does  not  contemplate  that  pupils  shall  enjoy  the 
benefit  of  a  full  term  of  school  in  their  own  township,  and  then 
attend  the  remainder  of  the  year  in  an  adjoining  township  at  the 
public  expense.  Only  equal  educational  facilities  can  be  claimed. 

SEC.  78.  The  object  of  this  section  is  to  protect  the  rights  of  the 
pupil,  and  at  the  same  time  prevent  abuses  of  the  privileges 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  37 

whether  before  or  after  the  enumeration,  or  of  the  resi- 
dence of  their  parents  or  guardians;  but  pupils  who  are 
sojourning  temporarily  in  one  district  township,  while 
their  actual  residence  is  in  another,  and  to  whom  the  last 
preceding  section  is  not  applicable,  may  attend  school 
upon  such  terms  as  the  board  of  directors  may  deem  just 
and  equitable. 

SEC.  79.     Pupils  may  attend  school  in  any  sub-district  JJPfSS*?^ 
of  the  district  township  in  which  they  reside,  with  the  eub-distwet   to 
consent  of  the  sub-director  of  such  sub-district,  and  of 
the  sub-director  of  the  sub-district  in  which  such  pupils 
reside. 

SEC.  80.     A  school  month  shall  consist  of  four  weeks  school  month, 
of  five  school  days  each. 

SEC.  81.     During  the  time  of  holding  a  teachers'  insti-  Teacher^  insti- 
tute, in  any  county,  any  school  that  may  be  in  session  in  tl 
such  county  shall  be  closed;  and  it  is  hereby  made  .the 
duty  of  all  teachers,  and  persons  desiring  a  teacher's  cer- 
tificate, to  attend  such  institute,  or  present  to  the  county 


conferred.  The  residence  of  the  pupil,  and  not  of  the  parent,  deter- 
mines his  right  to  attend  school.  The  parent,  for  example,  may 
reside  in  one  district  and  the  child  be  an  apprentice  in  another.  In 
such  case  he  must  be  permitted  to  attend  school  in  the  district  in 
which  he  resides.  But  if  the  parent  sends  him  into  another  district 
to  remain  for  a  limited  period,  and  perhaps  for  the  ostensible  pur- 
pose of  attending  a  better  school,  it  is  an  evasion  of  the  law ;  and  in 
such  case  he  can  only  attend  on  such  terms  as  may  be  prescribed  by 
the  boarci  of  directors. 

SEC.  81.  (a)  County  superintendents  may  revoke  certificates  of 
teachers  for  non-attendance  at  the  annual  institute  during  the  full 
time.  An  attendance  of  two  or  three  days  is  not  a  compliance  with 
the  law. 

(  b  )  It  is  believed  that  the  law  will  not  compel  the  suspension  of 
the  schools  and  the  attendance  of  teachers  at  more  than  one  institute 
in  each  year ;  but  such  institute  is  not  limited  by  law  to  one  week, 
(section  137.) 

(  c  )  Where  either  the  law  or  the  action  of  the  board  of  directors 
requires  the  suspension  of  schools,  teachers  are  entitled  "to  compen- 
sation precisely  as  though  there  had  been  no  interruption,  unless 
otherwise  stipulated  in  the  contract.  As  the  law  suspends  the 
schools  during  institute  week,  teachers  are  entitled  to  compensation. 
See  opinion  of  the  Attorney-General  in  School  Journal,  June,  1865. 
But  as  the  law  requires  the  attendance  of  teachers,  they  should  be 
paid  for  only  as  many  days  as  they  spend  in  the  institute. 


38  SCHOOL  IAW6   OF  IOWA. 

superintendent  satisfactory  reasons  for  not  so  attending, 
before  receiving  such  certificate. 

SEC.  82.      The  Bible  shall  not  be  excluded  from  any 
Bii>ic  not  to  be  school  or  institution  in  this  state,  under  the  control  of  the 
Board,  nor  shall  any  pupil  be  required  to  read  it  contrary 
to  the  wishes  of  his  parent  or  guardian. 

SEC.  83.      The  electors  of  any  school  district,  at  any 

German  or       legally  called  school  meeting,  may,  by  a  vote  of  a  major- 

mJyrbeait.f!!gM  ity  of  the  electors  present,  direct  the  German,  or  other 

"chS"ibs!ic         language,  to  be  taught  as  a  branch  in  one  or  more  of  the 

schools  of  said  district,  to  the  scholars  attending  the  same, 

whose  parents  or  guardians  may  so  desire;  and  thereupon 

it  shall  be  the  duty  of  such  board  of  directors  to  provide 

that  the  same  be  done :  Provided,  That  all  other  branches 

taught  in  said  school  or  schools,  shall  be  taught  in  the 

English  language:     Provided,  further,  That  the  person 

employed  in  teaching  the  said  branches  shall  satisfy  the 

county  superintendent  of  his  ability  and  qualifications,  and 

receive  from  him  a  certificate  to  that  effect. 


(d)  Teachers  are  entitled  to  the  following  legal  holidays:  "the 
first  day  of  January,  the  fourth  day  of  July,  the  twenty-fifth  day  of 
December,  and  any  day  appointed  or  recommended  by  the  Gov- 
ernor of  this  state  or  by  the  President  of  the  United  States  as  a  day 
of  fasting  or  thanksgiving."  (sec.  1814,  Rev.  1860),  and  they  cannot 
be  required  to  make  up  the  time. 

SEC,  82.  (a)  The  term''  board  "  in  this  section  refers  to  the  board 
of  education,  now  abolished,  and  the  "schools  "  and  "  institutions  " 
referred  to  are  those  which  "  are  instituted  to  receive  aid  from  the 
school  or  university-fund  of  this  state."  Art.  IX.,  sec.  8,  new  con- 
stitution of  Iowa. 

(  b )  While  moral  instruction  should  be  given  in  every  school, 
neither  this  section  nor  the  spirit  of  our  constitution  and  laws,  will 
permit  a  teacher  or  board  of  directors  to  enforce  a  regulation  in 
regard  to  religious  exercises,  which  will  bind  or  wound  the  con- 
science of  any ;  and  no  pupil  can  legally  be  required  to  conform  to 
any  particular  mode  of  worship,  against  the  expressed  wish  of 
parent  or  guardian.  Our  common  schools  are  maintained  at  public 
expense,  and  the  law  contemplates  that  they  shall  be  equally  free  to 
every  faith. 

A  very  suitable  devotional  exercise  for  our  public  schools,  and 
one  in  which  all  should  delight  to  join,  consists  in  the  reading  of  a 
portion  of  scripture  without  note  or  comment,  and  the  concert 
repetition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer;  but  even  in  this,  no  pupil  Can  be 
compelled  to  participate  in  opposition  to  the  expressed  wish  of 
parent  or  guardian. 


SCHOOL  IAWS   OF  IOWA.  39 


SEC.  84.     The  board  of  directors  of  each  school  district 
is  hereby  authorized  to  subscribe  for  and  take  at  least  one  subscribe  for 

,.  •/,       T  o    i        i    T  i  SchoolJournal. 

copy  ot  the  Iowa  bchool  J  ournal. 

SEC.  85.     The  copy  or  copies  of  the  Iowa  School  Jour-  school  journal 
nal,  which  may  be  subscribed  for  agreeably  to  the  provis-  library. dl 
ion  of  the  preceding  section,  shall  be  and  remain  a  part 
of  the  school  district  library. 

SEC.  86.      The  board  of  directors  of  any  district  town-  Boards  not^o 
ship  or  independent  district  shall  not  order,  or  direct,  or  books  oftener 
make  any  change  in  the  school  books,  or  series  of  text  three  years"1 
books,  used  in  any  school  under  their  superintendence, 
direction,  or  control,  more  than  once  in  every  period  of 
three  years,  except  by  a  vote  of  the  electors  of  the  district 
township  or  independent  district. 

SEC.  87.     No  appropriation   of  public  money  or  other  Public  money 

,     ,,    ,  \  -,  •/».     i  •       not  to  be  appro- 

property  shall  be   made,  and   no  gilt,  loan,  or  appropria-  priated  te  insti- 

tion  of  money  or  property  shall  be  authorized  or  made  by  sectarLlindcon- 
the  corporate   authorities,    supervisors,  or  trustees  of  any  troL 
county,  township,   city,  or  town,  or   municipal   organiza- 
tion of  this  state,  to,  or  in  favor  of  any  institution,  school, 
association,  or  object,  which  is  under  ecclesiastical  or  sec- 
tarian management  or  control. 

SEC.  88.  All  fines  and  penalties  collected  from  a  Fines  and  pen- 
school  district  officer  by  virtue  of  any  of  the  provisions  altl< 
of  this  chapter,  shall  enure  to  the  benefit  of  that  particu- 
lar district.  Those  collected  from  any  member  of  the 
board  of  directors  shall  belong  to  the  district  township, 
and  those  collected  from  county  officers,  to  the  county. 
In  the  two  former  cases  suit  shall  be  brought  in  the  name 
of  the  district  township  ;  in  the  latter  in  the  name  of  the 
county,  and  by  the  district  attorney.  The  amount  in 
each  case  shall  be  added  to  the  fund  next  to  be  applied 
by  the  recipient  for  the  use  of  common  schools. 


SEC.  $4.  The  law  contemplates  that  copies  of  the  ScJiool  Journal 
which  may  be  subscribed  for  in  pursuance  of  this  section  shall  be 
pnid  for  from  the  funds  of  the  district,  la  case  no  library  fund  is 
created,  an  order  may  be  drawn  on  the  "  contingent  fund."  The 
boards  are  not  limited  to  a  single  copy,  but  may  subscribe  for 
enough  copies  to  supply  one  to  each  member  of  the  board.  The 
copies  thus  subscribed  for  do  not  become  personal  property.  Sec- 
tions 85  and  94.  The  State  prorides  for  sending  a  copy  of  this 
Journal  to  each  county  superintendent. 

SEC.  85.  At  Iqast  one  complete  file  of  the  School  Journal  should 
be  kept  in  each  district,  and  permanently  bound  year  by  year  and 
preserved  for  future  reference. 


40  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

SEC.  89.  In  all  cases  where  a  school  district,  as  con- 
district  stituted  at  the  time  of  the  taking  effect  of  an  act  entitled 
er  more  "  An  act  for  the  public  instruction  of  the  state  of  Iowa," 

civil  townships.  approve(i  March  12th,  1858,  and  formed  of  a  part  of  two 
or  more  civil  townships  in  the  same  or  adjoining  counties, 
had  a  school-house  erected,  which  said  house  had  not 
been  destroyed,  removed  or  abandoned,  said  district  as 
at  that  time  constituted  shall  be  and  remain  a  sub-dis- 
trict in,  and  form  a  part  of  the  district  township  in  which 
such  school-house  is  situated,  for  voting,  taxation,  enu- 
meration of  children,  distribution  of  money,  and  all  other 
school  purposes,  as  fully  as  though  said  sub-district  were 
all  included  within  the  township  in  which  the  school 
house  is  situated.  And  the  boundaries  of  such  sub-dis- 
trict shall  not  be  changed,  except  with  the  concurrence  of 
the  boards  of  directors  of  the  townships  interested  :  Pro- 
vided, That  upon  the  written  application  of  two-thirds  of 
the  electors  residing  upon  the  territory  within  the  town- 
ship in  which  the  school-house  is  not  situated,  to  the 
respective  boards  of  directors,  or  when  said  school-house 
has  been  removed,  or  said  territory  is  uninhabited,  it 
shall  remain  under  the  jurisdiction  of,  and  form  a  part  of 
the  district  township  to  which  it  geographically  belongs  ; 
and  any  tax  which  has  been  levied  on  said  territory  for 
the  construction  of  a  school-house  at  any  other  site  than 

school-house     the  one  originally  occupied,  shall  be  refunded   to  the  dis- 
led*    trict  township  to  which  said  territory  reverts,  for  the  con- 
struction of  a  school-house  in   the   sub-district  in  which 
said   territory   may  subsequently   be   included  ;  and  the 
respective  boards  of  directors  shall,  in  either  case,  divide 


SEC.  89.  («•)  The  design  of  the  present  law  is  to  make  each  civil 
township  a  school  district.  The  provisions  of  this  section,  and 
those  under  the  head  of  independent  school  districts,  together  with 
section  25  form  the  only  exceptions  to  the  general  rule.  The  sec- 
tion under  consideration  is  designed  simply  for  the  protection  of 
districts  that  were  formed  under  the  laws  in  force  prior  to  the  12th 
of  March,  1858. 

(b)  In  districts  formed  of  parts  of  two  or  more  counties,  the  sec- 
retary should  report  the  number  of  children  and  amount  of  taxes 
voted  in  the  respective  counties,  to  the  proper  officers  of  each 
county.  The  district  township  treasurer  will  receive  all  moneys 
accruing  to  the  district  from  each  county ;  and  in  all  such  cases 
the  secretary  should  certify  the  names  of  the  district  officers  to  the 
county  officers  of  each  county .  See  sec.  23,  and  note  to  same. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  41 

their   districts  in   accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 
section. 

SEO.  90.  Where  under  the  school  laws  of  the  state  hereto-  f™cts  cCom01" 
fore  in  force,  from  the  necessities  of  localities  arising  from  posed  of  parts 
natural  obstructions,  the  organization  of  school  districts  un-  may,  in  certafn 
der  said  laws  and  for  the  convenience  and  accommodation  °ntoSfnYe°p7ndd 
of  the  people,  school  districts  were  formed  of  portions  of  two  ent  districts, 
counties  of  territory  lying  contiguous  to  each  other,  and 
where,  under  present  laws,  such  districts  are  not  provided 
for,  at  the  written  request  of  five  legal  voters  residing  in 
portions  of  said  territory  in  each  county,  the  board  of 
directors  of  the  district  township  to  which  such  territory 
belongs,  having  a  majority  of  the  legal  voters,  shall  fix 
the  boundaries  of  an  independent  school  district  composed 
of  such  sections  of  land,  or  portions  thereof,  as  may  be 
specified  and  described  in  the  petition  for  such  independ- 
ent district,  and  shall  give  at  least  ten  days  notice  of  the 
submission  of  the  question  of  the  formation  of  said  inde- 
pendent district  to  the  legal  voters  of  the  contemplated 
independent  district,  at  a  special  election  for  said  purpose, 
specifying  the  boundaries  of  the  district,  the  time  and 
place  of  the  meeting  of  the  electors  of  [in]  the  district 
containing  a  majority  of  the  legal  voters,  at  which  meet- 
ing the  electors  in  the  contemplated  district  shall  vote  by 
ballot  for  or  against  a  separate  organization.  Should  a 
majority  of  the  votes  be  cast  in  favor  of  such  separate 
organization,  the  said  board  of  directors  shall  proceed  by 
ballot  to  elect,  in  the  manner  now  provided  by  law,  the 
necessary  officers,  and  organize  said  independent  district. 

SEC.  91.     When  a  judgment  has  been  obtained  against  Judgment 
a  school  district,  it  shall   be   the  duty  of  the  board  of  di-  tnc"1Show 
rectors  to  pay   off  and   satisfy  the  same,  from  the  proper  settled- 
fund,  by  an  order  on  the*  treasurer  of  the  district;  and  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  district   meeting  at  the  time  for 
voting  a  tax  for  the   payment   of  other  liabilities  of  the 
district  to   provide   for   the   payment  of  such   order   or 
orders. 

SEC.  92.     In  case  a  school  district  has  borrowed  money 


rSEC.  90.  This  section  will  have  a  very  limited  application.  The 
formation  of  independent  districts  under  its  provisions  can  only 
take  place  when  a  school  district  which  has  formerly  existed, 
embracing  portions  of  two  counties,  has  since  been  dissolved,  and 
the  inhabitants  thereby  deprived  of  school  facilities.  Its  passage 
was  secured  to  provide  for  the  formation  of  a  single  district.  It 
may  possibly  apply  to  some  others. 
86 


42 


SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 


tax- 


1"  °f  the  .  Scll°o1  fnnd»  Jt  sha11    he     the     dlltJ    °f  tllO  board  of 

supervisors  to  levy  such  tax,  not  exceeding  five  mills  on 
the  dollar  in  any  one  year,  on  the  taxable  property  of  the 
district  as  constituted  at  the  time  of  making  such  loan,  as 
may  be  necessary  to  pay  the  annual  interest  on  said  loan, 
and  the  principal  when  the  same  /falls  due,  unless  the 
board  of  supervisors  shall  see  proper  to  extend  the  time 
of  said  loan. 

SEC.  93.  No  district  township  meeting,  or  sub-district 
meeting,  shall  organize  earlier  than  nine  o'clock,  A.  M., 
nor  ac[journ  before  twelve  o'clock  M.  ;  aud  in  all  independ- 
ent school  districts,  the  polls  shall  remain  open  from  nine 
o'clock  A.  M.,  to  four  o'clock  P.  M. 

SEC.  94.     When  any  school  officer  is  superseded  by 

tod3?verSwks  e^ec^on  or  otherwise,  he  shall  immediately  deliver  to  hi's 

and  papers.       successor  in  office,  all  books,  papers  and  moneys  pertain- 

ing to  his  office,  taking  a  receipt  therefor;  and  every  such 

officer  who  shall  refuse  to   do  so,  or  who  shall  wilfully 

mutilate  or  destroy  any  such  books  or  papers,  or  any  part 

thereof,  or  shall  misapply   any  moneys   entrusted  to  him 

by  virtue  of  his  office,  shall  be  liable  to  the  provisions  of 

the  general  statutes  for  the  punishment  of  such  offenses. 

SEC.  95.     Nothing  in  this  chapter  shall  be  so  construed 

d£ricKo°vn-°f  as  to  giye  tne  board  of  directors  .  of  a   district  township, 

Chipboard,       jurisdiction  over  any  territory   included   within  the  limits 

of  any  city  or  village,  with  the  territory   annexed  thereto 

for  school  purposes,  which  has  organized  separately  as  an 

independent  district. 

INDEPENDENT    DISTRICTS. 

SEC.  96.     Any  city  or  town,  containing  not  less   than 

SEC.  93.  The  object  of  this  section  is  to  prevent  a  few  designing 
persons  from  meeting  at  an  unusual  hour,  dispatching  the  business 
with  unseemly  haste,  and  adjourning  before  many  of  the  electors 
arrive.  The  meeting  should  be  conducted  with  entire  fairness,  and 
an  opportunity  given  for  an  expression  of  the  real  sentiment  of  the 
district.  The  meeting  may  assemble  at  any  time  after  nine  o'clock, 
A.  M.,  and  continue  in  session  as  long  after  twelve  M.,  as  circum- 
stances require. 

SEC.  94.  See  sections  4243,  4253,  4254,  and  4265,  and  other  pro- 
visions of  part  fourth,  title  xxm,  of  the  Revision  of  1860. 

The  language  of  this  section  includes  copies  of  the  ScJwol  Journal, 
Reports,  and  all  other  publications  wlrch  may  be  received  by 
virtue  of  being  a  school  officer. 

SEC.  96.    (a)    The  word  town  as  used  in  this  section  means  a  sur- 


SCHOOL  IAWS  OF  IOWA.  43 

three  hundred  inhabitants  yithin  its  recorded  plat,  may  be  £Jty  or  town  ^ 
constituted  a  separate  school  district,  and  territory  con  tig-  tutea  a  separate 
nous  to  such  a  city  or  town  may  be  included  with  it  as  a 
part  of  said  separate  district,  in   the   manner  hereinafter  • 
provided. 

SEC.  97.     At  the  written  request  of  any  ten  legal  vo-  Notice  of  eiec- 

.  , .  , ,        T      J    T        /.    T  P  tion  for  organ- 

ters  residing  in  such  city  or  town,  the  board  of  directors  ization. 
of  the  district  township  shall  establish  the  boundaries  of 
the  contemplated  school  district,  including  such  contigu- 
ous territory  as  may  best  subserve  the  convenience  of  the 
people  for  school  purposes,  and  shall  give  at  least  ten 
days'  previous  notice  of  the  time  and  place  for  a  meeting 
of  the  electors  residing  in  said  district,  by  posting  written 
notices  in  at  least  five  conspicuous  places  therein  ;  at 
which  meeting  the  said  electors  shall  vote  by  ballot  for  or 
against  a  separate  organization. 


veyed  village  whose  plat  is  recorded.  The  three  hundred  inhabit- 
ants must  be  contained  within  the  limits  of  the  city  or  town. 

SEC.  97.  (a)  The  independent  district  must  include  all  of  the 
city  or  town,  and  may,  if  approved  by  the  vote  of  the  electors,  in- 
clude as  much  contiguous  territory  as  the  board  of  directors  think 
proper.  It  is  not  limited  by  sub-district  lines,  but  may,  if  necessary, 
include  a  part  or  all  of  two  or  more  sub  districts. 

(b)  The  boundaries  of  independent  districts  are  not  limited  by 
civil  or  district  township  lines.  Ordinarily  the  officers  of  any  cor- 
poration can  exercise  no  authority  beyond  its  limits ;  but  in  the  for- 
mation of  independent  districts  the  law  clearly  contemplates  (section 
101)  that  they  may  extend  across  township  and  even  across  county 
lines.  The  object  is,  to  establish  such  boundaries  "  as  may  best  sub- 
serve the  convenience  of  the  people  for  school  purposes."  The  law 
(section  97)  makes  it  the  duty  of  one  board  of  directors  to  establish 
the  boundaries.  It  is  also  the  duty  of  one  board  (section  101)  to  give 
the  election  notice ;  and  a  fair  construction  of  the  law  makes  both  of 
these  duties  devolve  upon  the  same  board  ;  hence  the  conclusion  that 
the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  in  which  a  majority 
of  the  voters  of  the  contemplated  independent  district  reside,  may 
legally  establish  the  boundaries  of  said  independent  district  without 
the  concurrencs  of  any  other  board  of  directors,  even  when  said  ter- 
ritory is  comprised  in  two  or  more  civil  or  district  townships  "in 
the  same  or  adjoining  counties."  Says  the  Supreme  Court  in  the 
case  of  Fort  Dodge  City  School  District  v.  The  District  Township  of 
Wahkonsa,  XV  Iowa,  434 :  "  The  extent  of  this  territory  is  not  lim- 
ited." In  every  case  the  real  spirit  of  the  law  should  be  observed, 
and  only  "  such  contiguous  territory  as  may  best  subserve  the  con- 


44  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

SEC.  98.     Should  a  majority  of  votes  be  cast   in  favor 
Proceedings  in  of  such  separate   organization,  the  board  of  directors   of 
w  the  district  township  shall  give  similar  notice  of  a   meet- 
ing of  the  electors  for  the   election  of  a   president,  treas- 
urer, and  six  directors.     The  president,  treasurer,  and 
two  of  these  directors  shall  hold  their  office  until  the  first 
annual  meeting  after  their  election,  and  until   their  suc- 
cessors are  elected  and  qualified  ;  two  until  the   second ; 
and    two    until   the  third    annual  meeting1     thereafter? 


venience  of  the  people  for  school  purposes,"  should  be  included  in 
the  boundaries  of  the  independent  district. 

(c)  All  of  the  ''ten  legal  voters"  must  reside  within  the  limits  of 
the  city  or  town.    It  is  not  sufficient  that  they  reside  within  the  limits 
of  the  proposed  independent  district. 

(d)  The  notice  of  the  election  to  determine  the  question  of  a  sep- 
arate organization  should  state  with  clearness  the  boundaries  of  the 
proposed  district.    When  the  boundaries  extend  beyond  the  limits 
of  a  city  or  town,  thev  must  conform  to  lines  of   congressional 
divisions  of  land. 

(e)  In  the  absence  of  any  legal  provision  specifying  who  shall  act 
as  judges  of  this  election,  it  is  believed  that  it  should  be  conducted 
by  the  president  and  secretary  of  the  district  township  ;  but  in  their 
absence,  the  electors  present  at  the  place  of  voting  may  choose  judges 
of  the  election,  who,  before  entering  upon  the  discharge  of  their 
duties,  should  be  duly  sworn. 

(/)  All  of  the  electors  residing  within  the  proposed  limits  must 
be  permitted  to  vote  on  the  question  of  separate  organization.  Fort 
Dodge  City  School  District  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wahkonsa, 
XVII  Iowa,  85. 

SEC.  98.  (a)  This  section  provides  simply  for  the  primary  meet- 
ng  for  the  purpose  of  organizing  the  district.  At  such  meeting  the 
full  quota  of  directors  must  be  elected,  and  then  classified ;  so  that  at 
all  subsequent  elections  it  will  only  be  necessary  to  elect  a  president 
and  treasurer,  who  will  hold  for  one  year,  and  one-third  of  the  di- 
rectors, who  hold  for  three  years.  Under  this  regulation  there  will 
alwasbefour  directors  in  office  [two,  in  districts  having  a  popula- 
tion of  less  than  five  hundred]  with  one  or  two  years'  experience  in 
the  transaction  of  the  business  of  the  district.  The  organization  may 
take  place  on  the  day  fixed  for  the  annual  meeting  of  the  independ- 
ent districts,  the  second  Monday  in  March.  If  so,  the  directors  will 
hold  for  one,  two  and  three  years,  and  the  other  officer^  for  one  year. 
If  it  should  take  place  at  any  other  time,  one-third  of  the  directors 
will  hold  for  the  fraction  of  the  year  intervening  between  the  organ- 
ization and  the  next  regular  meeting,  one-third  for  one  year  and 


to  organ- 
ize meeting. 


SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA.  45 

their  respective  terms  terms  of  office  to  be  determined  by 
lot.     The  said  president  and  six  directors  shall  constitute  officers  of 
a  board  of  directors  for  the  district,  and  they  shall  at  their  boar(L 
first  regular  meeting  in  each  year  elect  a  secretary,  to  be 
chosen  outside  of  the  board.     Provided,  That  in   all   in- 
dependent districts  having  a  population  of  less  than  five 
hundred,  there  shall  be  three  directors  elected. 

SEC.  99.  Said  meeting  for  the  first  election  of  direct- 
ors  shall  organize  by  appointing  a  president,  and  secre- 
tary, who  shall  act  as  judges  of  the  election,  and  issue  a 
certificate  of  election  to  the  persons  elected. 

SEC.  100.     The  organization  of  such  independent  dis-  organization  to 

T     11     i  iji  -IP  ji         /•  i  i>  be  completed 

tnct  shall  be  completed  on  or  before  the  first  day  of  before  August. 
August  of  the  year  in  which  said  organization  is  attempt- 
ed, and  when  such  organization  is  thus  completed,  all 
taxes  levied  by  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  town- 
ship,of  which  the  independent  district  formed  a  part  in  that 
year,  shall  be  void  so  far  as  the  property  within  the  lim- 
its of  the  independent  district  is  concerned,  and  the  board 
of  directors  of  such  independent  district  shall  levy  all 
necessary  taxes  for  school  purposes  as  provided  by  law 
for  that  year,  at  a  meeting  called  for  that  purpose,  at  any 
time  before  the  third  Monday  of  August  of  that  year, 
which  shall  be  certified  to  the  board  of  supervisors  on  or 
before  the  first  Monday  of  September,  and  said  board  of 
supervisors  shall  levy  said  tax  at  the  time  and  in  the 
manner  that  school  taxes  are  required  to  be  levied  in  other 
districts. 

SEO.    101.     In    case  such  fchool  district  is  formed  of  Notice— when 

/»    .  •    •!     j  i  •         •         i  T     district  is  coin- 

parts  ot  two  or  more  civil  townships  in  the  same  or  ad-  posed  of  ai 
joining  counties,  the  duty  of  giving  the  notice   shall  de-  ei 
volve  upon  the  board  of  directors  of  the  township  in  which 
a  majority  of  the  legal  voters  of  the  contemplated  school 
district  reside. 


the  fraction,  and  one-third  for  two  years  and  the  fraction,  and  the 
other  officers  simply  for  the  fraction  of  the  year.  All  notices  and 
proceedings  connected  with  the  organization  of  the  district,  should 
be  recorded  by  the  secretary,  after  he  enters  upon  his  duties,  in  the 
records  of  the  district,  so  that  the  facts  concerning  its  formation  and 
organization  may  be  readily  obtained  in  case  the  validity  of  the  pro- 
ceedings should  ever  be  questioned. 

(6).  The  first  board  of  directors  of  an  independent  district  will  en- 
ter upon  the  discharge  of  official  duties  as  soon  as  qualified.  The  term 
of  office  of  subsequent  boards  will  commence  on  the  third  Monday 
of  March.  [Sections  13  ?-,nd  102]. 


46  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

SEC.    102.     Said   school   district   may  have  as   many 

ind.  district     schools,  and  be   divided  into  such  wards,  or  other  sub- 

fa^fOTdistiict  divisions  for  school  purposes,  as   the  board  of  directors 

township.         may  deem  proper;  and  shall  be  governed  by  the  laws  en- 

acted for  the  regulation  of  district  townships,  so  far  as  the 

same  may  be  applicable. 

SEC.  103.     It   shall  be  lawful  for  the  electors  of  any 
Electors  to  vote  independent  school  district,  at  the  annual  meeting  of  such 
01 


district,  to  vote  a  tax  not  exceeding  ten  mills  on  the  dol- 
lar, in  any  one  year,  on  the  taxable  property  of  such 
district,  as  the  meeting  may  deem  sufficient  for  the  pur- 
chase of  grounds  and  the  construction  of  the  necessary 
school-houses  for  the  use  of  such  independent  district,  and 
for  the  payment  of  any  debts  contracted  for  the  erection 
of  such  school-houses,  and  for  procuring  library  and  appa- 
ratus for  the  use  of  the  schools  of  such  independent  dis- 
statement  by  trict.  And  the  treasurer  shall  make  a  statement  to  the 
er?tri  tr"  district  meeting  of  the  receipts  and  disbursements  of  the 
preceding  year. 

SEC.    104.     The  annual  meeting  of  all   independent 

Directors  to  be  school   districts  shall  be  held  on  the   second  Monday  in 

lln^de-  March  for  the  transaction  of  the  business  of  the  district, 

tricts.  and  for  the  election  by  ballot  of  a  president  and  treasurer, 

who  shall  continue  in  office  for  one  year,  and  two  direc- 

tors as  the  successors  of  the  two  whose  term  expires,  who 

shall  continue  in  office  for  three  years;  and  the  president, 

secretary,  and  one  of  the  directors  then  in  office,  shall  act 

as  judges  of  the  election,  and  shall  issue  certificates  of 

election  to  the  persons  elected  for  the  ensuing  term:  Pro- 

vided^ That  in  all  independent  districts,  having  a  popula- 

tion  of  less  than  five  hundred,  there  shall   be   elected 

annually,  one   director,  who  shall  continue   in  office   for 

three  years. 

SEC.  105.     Where  an  independent  school  district  has 

Remainder  of    been  formed  out  of  a  civil  township  or  townships  as  here- 

trfc?\ownship!  *n  contemplated,  the  remainder  of  such  township,  or  of 

each  of  such  townships,  as  the  case  may  be,  shall  consti- 

tute a  district  township,  as  provided  in  the  first  section  of 

this  chapter,  and  the  boundaries  between  such  district 

Sac.  104.  In  case  the  district  should  tail  to  elect  officers  at  the 
annual  meeting  as  required  in  this  section,  the  president,  and  treas- 
urer, and  the  directors  whose  official  term  expires,  will  hold  over 
until  the  next  annual  meeting. 

The  board  of  directors  of  an  independent  district  possess  the 
same  general  powers  that  are  conferred  on  boards  of  directors  of  dis- 
rict  -townships. 


SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA.  47 

township  and  independent  school  district,  may  be  changed 
or  the  independent  district  abandoned,  at  any  time  with 
the  concurrence  of  their  respective  boards  of  directors. 

SEC.  106.     Independent  districts,  located  contiguous  to  independent 

,         ,  V,  T     ,,  i    j/i  •     i       districts  may 

each  other,  may  unite  and  torm  one  and.  me  same  inae-  unite, 
pendent  district,  in  the  manner  following :  At  the  written  How. 
request  of  any  ten  legal  voters  residing  in  each  of  said 
independent  districts,  their  respective  boards  of  directors 
shall  require  their  secretaries  to  give  at  least  ten  days' 
notice  of  the  time  and  place  for  a  meeting  of  the  electors 
residing  in  such  districts,  by  posting  written  notices  in  at 
least  five  public  places  in  each  of  said  districts,  at  which 
meetings  the  said  electors  shall  vote  by  ballot  for  or 
against  a  consolidated  organization  of  said  independent 
districts;  and  if  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast  at  the  elec- 
tion, in  each  district,  shall  be  in  favor  of  uniting  said  dis- 
tricts, then  the  secretaries  shall  give  similar  notice  of  a 
meeting  of  the  electors  as  provided  for  by  the  law  for  the 
organization  of  independent  districts.  The  independent 
district,  thus  consolidated,  shall  be  completed,  and  its  di- 
rectors governed  by  the  same  provisions  of  the  law,  which 
apply  to  other  independent  districts. 

SEC.  107.     The  boards  of  directors  of  the  several  inde-  f^^Sure? 
pendent  school  districts  are  hereby  required  to  publish  during  past 
two  weeks  before  the  annual  school  election  in  such  dis-  Se  of^um  for 
trict,  by  publication  in  one  or  more  newspapers,  if  any  are 
published  in  such  district,  or  by  posting  up  in  writing,  in 
not  less  than  three  conspicuous  places  in  such  independ- 
ent district,  a  detailed  and  specific  statement  of  the  receipts 
and  disbursements  of  all  funds  expended  for  school  and 
building  purposes  for  the  year  preceding  such  annual 
election.       And  the  said  boards  of  directors  shall  also,  at 
the  same  time,  publish  in  detail  an  estimate  of  the  several 
amounts  which,  in  the  judgment  of  such  board,  are  nec- 
essary to  maintain  the  schools  in  such  district  for  the  next 
succeeding  school  year. 

SEC.  108.     The   corporate   name   of    all  independent 
school  districts  formed  under  the  provisions  of  the  preced-  tncts. 
ing  sections,  or  either  of  them,  shall  be  "  The  independent 

school  district  of ,  "  (adding  the  name  of  the  city, 

village,  or  town  where  established,  as  the  case  may  be ) 

SEC.  109.  .    The  sub-districts  of  any  district  township  sub-districts 
may  be  constituted  separate  and  independent  school  dis-  tutedtndepend- 
tricts,  in  the  manner  hereinafter  provided. 

SEC.  110.     At  the  written  request  of  one-third  of  the  Election  to  be 

,         ,  .  ,.         .  T   ,•    .  i  •  i  called  at  the 

legal  voters  residing  in  any  district  township,  the   board  written  request 
of  directors  shall  call  a  meeting  of  the  qualified  electors  of 


48  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

the  school  district  township,  at  the  usual  place  of  hold- 
ing the  annual  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  such 
district  township,  by  giving  at  least  ten  day's  notice 
thereof,  by  posting  three  written  notices  in  each  sub-dis- 
trict in  the  township,  and  by  publication  in  a  newspaper, 
if  one  be  published  in  the  township,  at  which  meeting  the 
said  electors  shall  vote  by  ballot  for  or  against  a  separate 
organization. 

SEC.  111.      Should  a  majority  of  the  votes  be  cast  in 
Notice  of  first  favor  of  such  separate  organization,  the  board  of  directors 
boTrd°of0direc-  shall  call  meetings  in  each  sub-district  in  the  township, 
of  the  qualified  electors  thereof,  in  the  manner  and  for  the 
purpose  as  provided  in  section  ninety-seven  of  this  chap- 
Three  directors  ter.     Provided.  That  if  the  number  of  inhabitants  of  any 

to  be  chosen  m          .          ,,..-,  n 

districts  of  less  such  suo-distnct  does  not  exceed  live  hundred,  then  but 
dreS  inhabihnn  three  directors  shall  be  chosen,  who  shall  hold  their  offices 
one,  two,  and  three  years,  respectively,  the  length  of  their 
respective  terms  to  be  determined  by  lot,  and  but  one 
director  shall  be  chosen  annually  thereafter,  who  shall 
hold  his  office  three  years. 

SEC.  112.  At  the  meetings  of  the  electors  of  each  sub- 
Name  of  dis-  district,  as  provided  in  the  last  section,  they  shall  also  de- 
de^ermfned*  by  termine  by  ballot  the  name  to  be  given  to  their  district, 
ballot.  an(j  each  District,  when  so  organized  shall  be  a  body  cor- 

porate, and  the  name  so  chosen  shall  be  its  corporate 
name :  Provided,  That  the  board  of  directors  of  any  district 
May  be  organized  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  may  change  its 
name,  if  any  other  district  in  the  township  shall  have 
chosen  the  same  name. 

SEC.  113.  Districts  organized  under  the  provisions  of 
TO  be  governed  this  act,  shall  be  governed  and  treated  in  every  respect  as 

by  law  for  inde-  •111        ,1       \  ^         •     i  j  i        i  j' ,    •    . 

pendent  dis-  provided  by  the  law  creating  independent  school  districts. 
SEC.  114.  When  any  district  township  is  divided  into 
S^cwSfV*  independent  school  districts  under  the  provisions  of  this 
make  division  act,  then  the  old  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township 
nabS !  ties ant  shall  make  such  a  division  of  assets  and  liabilities  of  such 

district  township  as  is  provided  by  section  four  of  this 

chapter. 

BONDS  AND    ORDEES. 

SEC.  115.     Independent  school  districts  shall  have  the 
indent  school  power  and  authority  to  borrow  money  for  the  purpose  of 
r  erecting     and     completing     school-houses,    by     issuing 
build"    negotiable  bonds  of  the  independent  district,  to  run  any 
period  not  exceeding  ten  years,  drawing  a  rate  of  interest 
not  to  exceed  ten  per  centum  per  annum,  which  interest  may 
be  paid  semi-annually,  which  said  indebtedness  shall  be 


SCHOOL  L.VWS  OF  IOWA..  49 

binding  and  obligatory  on  the  independent  district  for  the  Maximum,  ten 

1«T  •    "1         1  Till  1  1  1  \6clrfe 

use  of  which  said  loan  shall  have   been  made:  but  no  ten  per  cent 
district  shall  permit  a  greater  outstanding  indebtedness in 
than  an  amount  equal  to  five  per  centum   of  the   last  Debt  limited, 
assessed  value  of  the  property  of  the  district. 

SEC.  116.     When  any  independent  district    has  pro-  SBStewtaM 
cured  the  site  for  and  is  ready  to  erect,  or  has  erected  and  of  district, 
is  desirous  of  completing,  its    school-house,  it  shall   be 
lawful  for  the  school  board  of  such  district  to  submit  to 
the  voters  of  their  district,  at  the  annual  or  a  special  meet- 
ing, the  question  of  issuing  bonds  as  contemplated  by  the 
preceding  section,  giving  the  same  notice  of  such  meeting  Notice  of  eiec- 
as  is  now  required  by  law  to  be  given  for  the  election   of il 
officers  of  such  districts,  and  the  amount  proposed  to  be 
raised  by  the  sale  of  such  bonds,  which  question  shall  be 
voted  upon  by  the  electors;  and  if  a  majority  of  all  the 
votes  cast  on  that  question  be  in  favor  of  such  loan,  then 
said  school-board  shall  issue  bonds  to  the  amount  voted 
in  denominations  of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars,  nor 
exceeding  one  thousand  dollars,  due  not  more  than  ten 
years  a'ter  date,  and  payable  at  the  pleasure  of  the  district  Payable  at 
at  any  time  before  due,  which  said  bonds  shall  be  given  pleasure  of  di?- 

,   J  „  ,,       .     ,'  ,    -,.    ,    .    ,    .         .         ^         &         T  trict  before  due. 

in  the  name  of  the  independent  district  issuing  them,  and 
shall  be  signed  by  the  president  of  the  board  and  delivered 
to  the  treasurer,  taking  his  receipt  therefor,  who  shall  nego- 
tiate said  bonds  at  not  less  than  their  par  value,and  counter- 
sign the  same  when  negotiated.  The  treasurer  shall  stand  Di 
charged  upon  his  official  bond  with  all  bonds  that  may  be 
delivered  to  him;  but  any  bond  or  bonds  not  negotiated 
may  be  returned  by  him  to  the  board. 

SEO.  117.     Nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  deemed  to  con-  construction  of 
flict  or  interfere  with  sub-division  five,  of  section  seven,  of  at 
this  chapter,  but  if  the  electors  of  an  independent  school 
district  which  has  issued  bonds  shall  at  the  annual  meet- 
ing in  March,  for  any  year,  fail  to  vote  sufficient  school- 
house  tax  to  raise  a  sum  equal  to  the  interest  on  the  out- 
standing bonds  which  will  accrue  during  the  then  coming 
year,  and  such  proportionate  portion  of  the  principal  as 
will  liquidate  and  pay  off  said  bonds  at  maturity,  then  it 
shall  be  lawful  for  the  school  board  of  such  district  to  vote 
a  sufficient  rate  on  the  taxable  property  of  the  district  to  Jo  vmetaLfto's 
pay  such  interest,  and   such  portion  of  the  principal  as  iiay  interest, 

*  MI  -IT          i      •       /•   n   i     r  i        ii  />   ,1      •  *I       •,        etc.,  board  may 

will  pay  said   bonds  in  lull  by  the  time  ot  their  maturity,  levy  tax. 
and  shall  cause  the  same  to  be  certified  and  collected  the 
same  as  other  school  taxes. 

sT 


50  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

SEC.  118.     All  school  orders  shall  draw  six  per  cent. 
school  orders  to  interest  after  having  been  presented  to  the  treasurer  of  the 
'    district,  and  not  paid  for  want  of  funds,  which  tact  shall 
be  indorsed  upon  the  order  by  the  treasurer. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE    SITES. 

SEC.  119.  It  shall  be  lawful  for  any  school-board, 
mCaho°ikeasit8es  w^e*Der  °^  district  township  or  independent  district  to 
o^schooi-81  es  take  and  hold,  under  the  provisions  contained  in  this 

chapter,  so  much  real  estate  as    may  be  necessary  for 

the  location  and  construction  of  a  school-house,  and  con- 
not  to  exceed     venient  use  of  the  school:  Provided,  That  the  real  estate 

so  taken,  otherwise  than  by  the  consent  of  the  owner  or 

owners,  shall  not  exceed  one  acre. 
not  to  be  in  $EC.  120.     All  grounds  appropriated  to  orchards,  gar- 

orcn.uru.s,    §**r-     ~\  -*  ii*i  i      11      i  i  '  o 

dens,  or  public  dens,  and  public  parks,  shall  be  excluded  from  the 
Sd-  ;  m  provisions  of  this  chapter,  and  all  sites  shall  be  selected 
Xwnlhips8™?  on  some  Public  road,  and  not  within  twenty  rods  of  any 
within  20  rods  residence,  without  the  consent  of  the  owner,  except  in 

of  residence,  *»  •    j  j       i_  j  •    •    •    > 

without  con-     case  of  independent  districts. 

SEO.  121.     If  the  owner  of  any  real  estate,  on  which 
if  owner  refuses  said   school-board   may  desire  to  locate  a  school-house, 
found  refuses  or  neglects  to  grant  the  site  on  his  or  her  premises, 
p0      or,  if  such  owner  cannot  be  found,  the  county  superin- 
tendent  of  the  county  in   which  said  real  estate  may  be 
situated,  shall,  upon  application  of  either  party,  appoint 
three    disinterested    persons   of    said    county,   unless   a 
smaller  number  is  agreed  upon  by  the   parties,  whose 
duty  it  shall  be,  after  taking  an  oath  or  affirmation  to 
faithfully  and  impartially  discharge  the  duties  imposed  on 
them  by  this   section,  to  inspect   said    real   estate,  and 
Duty  of  ap-      assess  the  damages  which  said  owners  will  sustain  by 
praisers.          ^  appr0priation  of  his  or  her  land  for  the  use  of  said 
Co.  supt.  to      house  and  school,  (said  county  superintendent  giving  to 
notify  owner,    foe  owner   of    such  real  estate   the  same   notice  as  is 
required  for  the  commencement  of  a  suit  at  law  in  the 
district  court  of  Iowa,  of  the  time  of  such  assessment  of 
Appraisers  to    damages,)  and  make  a  report  in  writing  to  the  county 
Supt'  superintendent  of   said   county,  (giving  the   amount  of 
damage,  description  of  laud,   and   exact   location,)  who 
shall  file  and  preserve  the  same  in  his  office.     If  said 
school-board     school-board  shall,  at  any  time   before  they  enter  upon 
land   for   the   purpose  of  building  or"  constructing 


SEC.  118.    For  remarks  on  school  orders,  see  notes  to  sections  21 
and  32. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

said  house,  deposit  with  the  county  treasurer,  for  the  use 

of  said  owner,  the  sum  so  assessed   as  aforesaid,  they 

shall  be  thereby  authorized  to  build  or  construct  said 

house,  and  maintain  their  right  to  said  premises:    Pro- 

vided, That  either  party  may  have  the  right  to  appeal 

from  such  assessment  of  damages,  to  the  circuit  court  of  final- 

the   county   where   such   real   estate   is  situated,  within 

twenty  days  after  receiving  notice  that  such  as'sessment 

is  made,  which  appeal  shall  be  final;  but  such  appeal 

shall  not  delay  the  prosecution  of  work  upon  said  house 

if  said  school-board  shall  first  pay,  or  deposit  with  the 

county  treasurer,  the  amount  so  assessed  by  such  apprais-  pea1'  etc- 

ers,  and  in  no  case  shall  said  school-board  be  liable  for 

costs   on   appeal,  unless  the  owner  of   said  real  estate 

shall   be   adjudged  a  greater  amount  of   damages  than  Board  to  pay 

was  awarded  by  said  appraisers.     The  school-board  shall  Sessment! 

in  all  cases  pay  costs  of  the  first  assessment. 

SEC.  122.     The  title  acquired  by  said  school  districts  Title  for  school 
in  and  to  said  real  property,  shall  be  for  school  purposes  purP°ses  onl-v 
only,  and  in  case  the  same  should  cease  to  be  used  for 
said  purpose  for  the  space  of  two  years,  then  the  title 
acquired  in  said  land  under  this  chapter  shall  revert  to  the 
owner  of  the  fee-simple  title  of  the  same  upon  the  re-pay-  whenVert' 
ment  by  him  of  the  principal  amount  paid  for  said  land 
by  said  districts  without  interest,  together  with  the  value 
of  any  improvements  thereon  erected  by  said  district. 

APPEALS. 

SEC.  123.     Any  person  aggrieved  by  any  decision  or 
order  of  the  district  board  of  directors,  in  matter  of  law  or 


of  fact,  may,  within  thirty  days  after  the  rendition  of  such  supt. 

SEC.  123.  (a)  Not  every  person  can  take  an  appeal.  The  right 
is  limited  to  persons  "aggrieved"  or  injuriously  affected  by  the 
decision  or  order  complained  of.  Strangers  or  parties  without  inter- 
est cannot  be  plaintifl  in  such  a  case. 

(b)  The  right  to  appeal  is  limited  to  thirty  days.    After  the  ex- 
piration of  that  time,  the  county  superintendent  is  not  justified  in 
entertaining  an  appeal. 

(c)  All  the  decisions  or  orders  of  the  board  of  directors  are  sub- 
ject to  revision  on  appeal  ;  when  the  act  complained  of  is  of  a  discre- 
tionary character,  the  action  of  the  board  should  be  sustained,  unless 
it  is  clearly  shown  that  the  board  violated  law,  abused  its  discretion, 
or  acted  with  great  injustice.    (Edwards  vs.  The  District  Township  of 
West    Point.     Decided  February  15,   1868,  212,  Scliool  Journal  for 
April,  1868.) 


:y2  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF   IOWA. 

decision,  or  the  making  of  such  order,  appeal  therefrom 
to  the  county  superintendent  of  the  proper  county. 

SEC.  124-.     The  basis  of  the  proceeding  shall  be  an 
By  affidavit.      affidavit,  filed  by  the  party  aggrieved,   with  the  county 
superintendent,  within  the  time  for  taking  the  appeal. 

SEC.  125.     The  affidavit  shall  set  forth  the  errors  com- 
whatit  shall    plained  of  in  a  plain  and  concise  manner. 

SEC.  126.     The    county   superintendent   shall,  within 
oo.  supt.  to      five  days  after  the  filing  of  such  affidavit  in  his  office, 

to  notify  Secre-        t .  „     *..  P.,  ,.    ,    .    .     .  .   .  ' 

tary  of  appeal,   notify  the  secretary  of  the  proper  district  in  writing,  of 


SEC.  124  An  affidavit  is  a  statement  in  writing,  signed  and  made 
upon  oath  before  an  authorized  magistrate.  A  county  superintend- 
ent can  have  no  proper  jurisdiction  of  an  appeal  case  until  such  affi- 
davit has  been  filed.  A  notice  of  intention  to  file  an  affidavit,  a  ver- 
bal complaint,  or  a  petition,  is  not  sufficient  to  give  the  county  su- 
perintendent jurisdiction  in  appeal  cases.  The  affidavit  setting  forth 
"  the  errors  complained  of  in  a  plain  and  concise  manner  "  must  be 
in  his  hands  before  he  is  justified  in  commencing  proceedings.  Until 
that  event  transpires  he  has  no  legal  jurisdiction.  (Curry  v.  District 
Township  of  Franklin,  decision  rendered  March  26,  1868;  School 
Journal  for  May,  1868,  p.  250.) 

SEC.  125.  (a)  It  evidently  is  unnecessary  to  insist  strictly  upon 
any  particular  form  of  affidavit ;  but  the  law  requires  that  it  shall 
"set  forth  the  errors  complained  of  in  &  plain  and  concise  manner. 

The  affidavit  should  contain,  first,  a  statement  in  a  general  way  of 
the  decision  complained  of,  and  its  date ;  second,  a  statement  of  the 
facts  showing  that  the  appellant  has  an  interest  in  the  decision  and 
is  injuriously  affected  by  it ;  third,  the  assignment  of  errors. 

This  affidavit  being  the  first  paper  filed,  care  should  be  taken  that 
the  case  therein  be  properly  entitled  ;  and  the  title  then  bestowed 
should  be  preserved  throughout  the  further  progress  of  the  appeal. 

(6)  The  date  of  filing  should  be  indorsed  upon  the  affidavit  by 
the  superintendent. 

SEC.  126.  (a)  The  notice  should  describe  the  decision  or  order 
appealed  from,  so  that  it  may  be  identified,  and  should  require  the 
district  secretary  to  file  the  transcript  with  the  superintendent  within 
the  time  limited.  Personal  service  of  this  notice  is  of  course  the 
most  satisfactory,  and  should  be  had  when  practicable.  It  can  hard- 
ly have  been  contemplated,  however,  that  the  superintendent  should 
travel  all  over  the  couuty;  serving  notices.  The  statute  makes 
provision  for  the  payment  of  postage  by  the  appellant,  but  for  no 
other  expenses.  It  will  often,  if  not  ordinarily,  be  the  case  that  the 
notices  required  under  the  statute  we  are  considering,  will  have  to 
be  served  by  being  sent  through  the  post-office  to  the  proper  ad- 
dress. 


SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA,  53 

the  taking  of  such  appeal.      And  the  latter  shall,  within  Must  file  tran- 
ten  days  after  being  thus  notified,  file  in  the  office  of  the  sc 
county  superintendent  a  complete  transcript  of  the  record 
and  proceedings  relating  to  the  decision  complained  of, 
which  transcript  shall  be  certified  to  be  correct  by  the 
secretary. 

SEC.  127.  After  the  filing  of  the  transcript  aforesaid 
in  his  office,  he  shall  notify  in  writing  all  persons  ad- 

The  district  secretary  on  receiving  the  notice,  should  indorse  the 
date  of  its  receipt,  and  file  it  with  the  records  of  the  district  town- 
ship. 

(6)  What  are  the  "  record  and  proceedings  "  referred  to  ?  Of 
course  minutes  of  the  proceedings  of  the  district  board  by  the  dis- 
trict secretary,  are  of  the  record.  But  this  is  not  all.  The  petitions, 
remonstrances,  plais  and  other  papers  filed  with  the  secretary,  and 
relating  to  business  before  the  board,  are  as  much  a  part  of  the  rec- 
ord as  the  record  entries.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  district  secretary  to 
send  up  a  transcript  not  only  of  all  his  minutes  that  relate  to  the 
matter  appealed  from,  but  also,  of  all  petitions,  remonstrances  and 
other  papers  relating  to  the  same  matter. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  statute  requires  the  district 
secretary  to  send  up  a  transcript,  not  the  originals.  It  is  the  duty  of 
the  secretary  to  keep  in  his  own  office  all  papers  originally  filed 
with  him.  He  should  send  only  a  copy  of  these  to  the  superinten- 
dent. 

The  district  township  is  a  municipal  corporation,  act'ingby  a  board 
of  directors.  This  board  has  a  president  to  preside  over  its  meetings 
and  a  secretary  to  record  its  proceedings.  In  the  case  of  this  corpo- 
ration, as  of  any  other,  it  is  the  minutes  of  the  proceedings  of  the 
b  >ard  kept  by  its  secretary,  that  show  its  official  acts;  and  it  is  a  cer- 
tified transcript  from  these  minutes,  which  brings  officially  before 
the  superintendent  the  decision  complained  of.  Until  he  has  re- 
ceived such  transcript,  the  superintendent  has  nothing  before  him 
to  either  reverse  or  affirm.  Where  merely  a  letter  is  sent  up,  the 
superintendent  should  refuse  to  act  upon  it,  and  should  notify  the 
secretary  to  send  up  such  a  transcript  as  the  law  requires,  and  should 
refuse  to  proceed  with  the  appeal  until  it  is  received. 

This  section  requires  the  district  secretary  to  file  the  transcript  in 
the  office  of  the  superintendent.  It  will  probably  be  sufficient  to 
mail  it  to  the  superintendent's  address. 

SEC.  127.  Who  are  the  "persons  adversely  interested,"  and 
therefore  entitled  to  notice,  may  sometimes  present  a  question  of 
no  small  difficulty.  If  the  transcript  discloses  petitions  and  remon- 
strances in  regard  to  the  decision  appealed  from,  and  the  appeal  is 


54  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 


versely  interested,  of  the  time  and  place  where'  the  mat- 
ter of  the  appeal  will  be  heard  by  him. 
May  hear  testi-      SEO.  128.     At  the  time  thus  fixed  for  hearing,  he  shall 
.  near  testimony  for  either  party,  and  for  that  purpose  may 

by  one  of  these  parties,  it  will  ordinarily  be  sufficient  to  give  notice 
to  the  opposing  parties  as  shown  by  the  transcript. 

The  practice  seems  to  prevail  to  some  extent,  of  giving  the  notice 
now  under  discussion  to  the  board  alone  from  which  the  appeal 
comes  ;  but  it  should  be  b»rne  in  mind  that  this  is  not  ordinarily 
a  full  compliance  with  the  law. 

It  is  impossible,  if  it  were  even  desirable,  to  state  in  advance,  any 
rule  for  determining  in  all  cases  who  are  ;he  "  persons  adversely 
interested."  The  superintendent  must  determine  this  question  from 
the  circumstances  ot  each  case  before  him.  This,  however,  should 
be  borne  in  mind  :  in  all  appeal  cases  there  are  two  opposing 
parties,  and  the  law  contemplates  that  both  these  parties  shall  be 
represented  at  the  trial,  or  at  least  have  the  opportunity  to  appear. 
The  utmost  care  should  be  taken  that  the  proceedings  be  not  ex  parte. 

Notice  should  be  given  to  the  appellant,  to  all  persons  interested, 
and  to  the  secretary  of  the  board  from  which  the  appeal  is  taken. 
It  should  be  personally  served  when  practicable,  and  when  this  can- 
not be  done,  the  superintendent  should  ascertain  the  address  of  the 
several  parties,  and  mail  notices  to  them  accordingly. 

SEC.  128.  County  superintendents,  in  entertaining  and  deter- 
mining cases  appealed  from  boards  of  school  directors,  are  not 
invested  with  judicial  powers.  The  District  Township  of  Sioux  City 
7.  Pratt,  XVII  Iowa,  16.  While,  according  to  the  decision,  the 
superintendent  is  not  a  court  in  the  strict  sense  ot  the  term,  he  is 
required  to  administer  oaths,  to  hear  evidence  on  both  sides,  and  to 
render  a  just  and  equitable  decision.  And  while  mere  technicali- 
ties should  not  be  permitted  to  prevent  the  attainment  of  justice,  it 
is  not  inappropriate  that  the  superintendent  should  be  governed  by 
the  same  rules,  as  to  evidence  and  practice  which  ordinarily  obtain 
in  courts.  As  an  appeal  may  be  taken  from  his  decision  to  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction,  and  as  in  that  event,  the 
superintendent  must  send  up  a  transcript,  and  the  trial  before  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction  must  be  on  the  same  evidence 
on  which  the  trial  was  had  before  the  county  superintendent,  it  is 
his  duty  to  make  and  keep  an  official  record  of  all  decisions  and  pro. 
ceedings,  and  it  is  of  the  first  importance  that  the  record  should  be 
full  and  complete.  This  record  must  embrace  not  only  all  acts  done 
and  decisions  made  by  the  superintendent,  but  also  all  testimony 
taken  before  him.  As  the  law  has  not  provided  for  him  a  clerk,  he 
must,  like  a  justice  of  the  peace,  be  his  own  clerk. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  55 

administer  oaths  if  necessary,  and  be  shall  make  such  de- 
cision as  may  be  just  and  equitable,  which  shall  be  final, 
unless  appealed  from  as  hereinafter  provided. 

The  minutes  of  the  superintendent  should  commence  with  the 
commencement  of  the  case,  by  noting  the  filing  of  the  appellant's 
affidavit.  He  will  afterwards,  as  the  acts  transpire,  note  the  sending 
of  the  notice  of  appeal  to  the  district  secretary,  the  filing  of  the 
transcript,  the  sending  of  notices  of  the  hearing,  and  any  adjourn- 
ment of  the  case  that  may  be  granted.  At  the  trial  he  will  care- 
fully note  down  the  names  of  all  paities  appearing  and  their  post- 
office  address  (for  it  may  be  in  further  progress  of  appeal,  that  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction  will  be  required  to  send  notices 
to  these  parties,)  and  whether  they  appear  for  or  against  the  appeal ; 
and  will  also  note  the  filing  of  all  papers  and  the  names  of  any 
witnesses  that  may  be  produced  and  in  whose  behalf  such  papers  or 
testimony  may  be  oftered.  The  decision  of  the  superintendent  will 
form  an  appropriate  close  of  his  minutes. 

The  law  requires  the  superintendent  to  hear  the  testimony  of  any 
witnesses  who  may  be  offered,  giving  him  for  that  purpose  authority 
to  administer  oaths.  The  testimony  of  such  witnesses  should  be 
written  down  at  the  time,  either  in  form  of  question  and  answer  or 
in  narrative  form  as  the  parties  may  desire  or  may  be  expedient, 
and  should  be  signed  and  sworn  to  by  the  witnesses,  as  in  taking 
depositions.  This  testimony  should  be  carefully  filed  with  the 
other  papers  of  the  case. 

The  papers  filed,  including  the  testimony,  are  of  the  record  of  the 
case,  as  much  so  as  the  minutes  or  the  decision  ;  and  these  papers 
together  with  the  superintendent's  entries  constitute  the  complete 
record  of  the  case. 

It  may  be  said  that  this  mode  of  practice  throws  a  great  deal  of 
labor  on  the  superintendent.  This  is  more  in  appearance  than  in 
reality.  If  the  superintendent  will  make  his  entries  at  the  proper 
times  as  the  case  progresses,  and  will  take  down  the  testimony  as  the 
same  is  given  in,  very  little  more  time  than  will  be  taken  than  if  no 
record  were  kept,  and  the  result  will  be  infinitely  more  satisfactory 
to  himself  and  to  all  parties  concerned.  In  this,  as  in  most  other  in- 
stances, it  will  be  found  that  to  do  the  work  in  hand  thoroughly  and 
well  at  the  time,  is  easier,  as  well  as  a  great  deal  better,  than  to 
do  it  imperfectly.  And  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  this  method,  or 
some  other  that  is  equivalent,  should  be  pursued  in  order  to  bring 
up  the  case  in  proper  shape  on  further  appeal  before  the  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction.  Indeed  it  may  be  said  that  the  entire 
system  of  appeals  under  consideration,  depends  for  its  success  more 
than  anything  else,  on  the  completeness  of  the  records  which  are 
kept  by  the  county  superintendents. 


56  SCHOOL  LAWS  OP  IOWA. 

SEO.  129.  An  appeal  may  be  taken  from  the  decision 
taB£atoh8iTer-  °^  ^e  ?ounty  superintendent  to  the  superintendent  of 
intendent  of  public  instruction,  in  the  same  manner  as  provided  in 
public  c-  thig  chapter  fur  taking  appeals  from  the  district  board  to 


SEC.  129.  (a)  The  most  important  question  under  this  section  is 
as  to  the  mode  of  trial  of  appeal  cases  before  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction.  Is  the  case  to  be  tried  before  him  on  the  trans- 
script  sent  up  ;  or  is  it  to  be  tried  on  original  testimony  submitted 
before  him,  as  is  the  case  in  trials  before  the  superintendent  ? 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  law  in  express  terms  requires  the 
county  superintendent  to  hear  original  testimony,  and  contains  no 
such  express  requirements  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion. 

If  we  suppose  that  the  case  must  be  heard  on  original  testimony 
as  though  it  had  never  been  tried  before,  it  follows  that  parties  in- 
terested must  bring  their  witnesses,  it  may  be  from  the  remotest  parts 
of  the  state  ;  and  the  trial  of  appeal  school-cases  before  the  super- 
intendent of  public  instruction  will  constitute  by  far  the  most  expen- 
sive litigation  known  to  our  laws.  The  expenses  of  an  appeal  from 
a  district  to  tne  supreme  court,  will  bear  no  comparison.  In  fact 
the  exercise  of  the  right  of  appeal  will  be  practically  confined  to 
that  small  portion  of  the  state  which  may  be  in  the  immediate  vi- 
cinity of  the  capital.  When  we  consider  this  result,  and  the  care 
taken  by  the  board  of  education,  which  is  apparent  all  through  the 
enactment,  to  avoid  costs  and  expenses  in  these  cases,  it  is  plain  that 
the  consideration  here  presented  is  entitled  to  very  great  weight  in 
determining  the  legislative  intent. 

It  may  fairly  be  inferred  that  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion should  not  hear  original  testimony  in  the  cases  submitted  before 
him.  He  has  only  jurisdiction  to  review  decisions  which  have  been 
before  pronounced  by  county  superintendents  ;  and  he  should  review 
these  decisions  on  the  transcipt  of  the  same  papers  and  evidence 
submitted  to  the  superintendent.  His  jurisdiction  is  appellate  ;  and 
cases  come  before  him  for  trial  as  chancery  cases  come  from  the  dis- 
trict courts,  before  the  supreme  court. 

The  general  course  to  be  pursued  in  appeals  to  the  superintendent 
of  public  instruction  is  the  same  as  in  appeals  to  county  super- 
intendents ;  and  the  suggestions  already  made,  while  considering 
the  latter  class  of  appeals,  are  for  the  most  part  applicable  to  the 
former  class.  First,  an  affidavit  must  be  filed  with  him.  by  the  party 
aggrieved.  What  his  affidavit  should  contain,  is  indicated  in  the 
remarks  upon  the  affidavit  to  be  filed  with  the  county  superintend- 
ent. It  then  becomes  the  duty  of  the  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction to  give  thirty  days'  notice  of  the  appeal  to  the  proper  su- 
perintendent, who  must  send  up  his  transcript  within  that  time  ;  and 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  57 


the  county  superintendent,  as  nearly  as  applicable,  ex- 
cept that  he  shall  give  thirty  days'  notice  of  the  appeal  to 
the  county  superintendent,  and  the  like  notice  shall  be 
given  the  adverse  party.      And  the  decision,  when  made,  Decision  final, 
shall  be  final. 


here  it  should  be  borne  in  mind,  as  in  the  case  in  the  district  secre- 
tary, that  what  the  law  requires  the  superintendent  to  send  up  is  a 
transcript — the  original  papers  should  all  be  carefully  filed  and  pre- 
served by  the  superintendents  in  their  own  offices. 

Upon  receiving  the  transcript  the  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction must  give  thirty  days'  further  notice  of  the  time 
of  hearing,  to  all  parties  concerned.  As  he  must  ascertain  from  the 
transcript  sent,  who  are  the  parties  interested  for  and  against  the 
appeal ;  and  as  from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  he  must  as  a  general 
thing  give  his  notices  by  mail,  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  that  the 
transcript  should  disclose  the  names  and  address  of  all  parties  appear- 
ing in  the  trial  before  the  county  superintendent. 

At  the  hearing,  parties  interested  may  appear  personally  or  by  at- 
torney, and  argue  their  cases  orally,  if  they  desire;  or  they  may 
send  written  arguments.  The  records  of  the  county  suprintendents 
will  furnish  the  data  required  for  these  arguments.  The  records  of 
cases  in  the  offices  of  county  superintendents  which  are  public  rec- 
ords, and  should  be  open  as  such  to  examination  by  all  parties  inter- 
ested, will  furnish  all  needed  data  where  access  to  the  transcript  sent 
up  is  inconvenient. 

(6)  Any  person  agrieved  by  any  decision  or  order  of  the  county 
superintendent,  (other  than  a  decision  in  the  case  of  an  appeal  from 
the  district  board  ot  directors,)  may  apply  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent for  a  re-hearing  of  the  cause  upon  its  merits,  the  proceed- 
ings to  correspond  as  nearly  as  possible  to  the  proceedings  in  the 
case  of  an  appeal  from  the  district  board  of  directors.  If  any  party 
is  aggrieved  by  the  result  of  this  investigation,  an  appeal  may  be 
taken  therefrom  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

This  plan  of  adjudicating  the  cases  has  been  adopted  after  mature 
reflection  ;  and  it  is  believed  to  be  the  most  simple  and  satifactory 
that  can  be  devised  under  the  present  law.  The  county  superinten- 
dent being  upon  the  ground,  a  more  speedy  and  thorough  examina- 
tion of  the  facts  can  be  made  than  if  original  evidence  were 
submitted  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  which  the 
law  does  not  probably  contemplate.  It  may  sometimes  happen,  that 
the  additional  evidence  adduced  on  such  an  investigation  may  de- 
termine the  county  superintendent  to  modify  or  reverse  his  decision  , 
or,  on  the  other  hand,  it  may  satisfy  the  appellant  of  the  justice  of 
s8 


58  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 

SEO.  130.  Nothing  in  tins  chapter  shall  be  so  con- 
render"ud5d  to  strue(^  as  ^°  authorize  either  the  county  or  state  superin- 
menteforUmgoney  tendent  to  render  a  judgment  for  money,  neither  shall 

they  be  allowed  any  other  compensation  than  is  now  al- 
KO  compensa-  lowed  by  law.  All  necessary  postage  must  first  be  paid 

by  the  party  aggrieved. 

SUPERINTENDENT    OF    PUBLIC    INSTRUCTION. 

SEC.  131.     The   superintendent   of  public   instruction 
Supervision,      shall  be  charged  with  the  general  supervision   of  all   the 
county  superintendents  and  all  the  common  schools  of  the 
conventions  of  state.     He  shall  meet  county  superintendents  in  conven- 
ient^   Q  tion  at  such  points   in  the   state   as   he   may  deem  most 
suitable  for  the  purpose,  and  by  explanation  and  discus- 
sion endeavor  to  secure  a  more  uniform  and   efficient   ad- 
Attend  teachers  ministration  of  school  laws.     He  shall  attend  teachers'  in- 
tes'         stitutes  in  the  several  counties  of  the  state  as  far  as   may 
be  consistent  with  the  discharge  of  other  duties  imposed 
by  law,  and  assist  by  lecture  or  otherwise  in  their  instruc- 
written  opin-    tion  an(j  management.     He  shall  render  a  written  opinion 

ions,  and  deter-  ,        ,    o  ,  .         ,  .  .  ,  .  f 

mine  appeals,  to  any  school  omcer  asking  it  touching  the  exposition  or 
administration  of  any  school  law ;  and  shall  determine  all 
cases  appealed  from  the  decision  of  county  superin- 

Reviseand  cod- tendents.     It  is   hereby   made   the   duty    of   superinten- 

ify  school  laws.  ,  «         ,  ,.       .      J.         ,.  .   J  n        i1.,.         n 

tendent  of  public  instruction  to  revise  and  codity  all 
school  laws  which  may  be  in  force  after  the  adjournment 
of  the  regular  session  of  each  general  assembly,  before 
printing  a  new  edition  of  said  laws  as  now  required  by 
statute. 

SEO.  132.  An  office  shall  be  provided  for  him  at  the 
office.  seat  of  government,  in  which  he  shall  file  all  papers,  re- 

Record  ports,  and  public  documents,  transmitted  to  him  by   the 

county  superintendents,  each  year  separately,  and  hold  the 
same  in  readiness  to  be  exhibited  to  the  governor,  or  to  a 
committee  of  either  house  of  the  general  assembly,  at  any 
time  when  required ;  and  he  shall  keep  a  fair  record  of 
all  matters  pertaining  to  his  office. 

SEC.  133.     He  may,  if  he  deem  it  expedient,  subscribe 

the  first  decision.  The  cases  of  this  kind  most  likely  to  arise,  are 
the  formation  of  sub-districts  from  the  parts  of  two  or  more  town- 
ships, as  provided  in  section  25  ;  the  refusal  to  grant  teachers'  cer- 
tificates, and  the  revocation  of  teachers'  certificates. 

See  opinion  of  Attorney-General  Bissell,  School  Journal  for  June, 
1867 ,  also,  Dougherty  v.  Tracy,  Co.  Supt.t  School  Journal  for  Octo- 
ber, 1871. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  59 

for  a  sufficient  number  of  copies  of  the  "  Iowa  School  subscribe  for 
Journal,"  or  of  such  other  educational  journal  published 
in  the  state,  as  he  may  select,  to  furnish  each  county  su- 
perintendent with  one  copy,  and  his  certificate  of  having 
thus  subscribed,  shall  be  authority  for  the  auditor  of  state 
to  issue  his  warrant  for  the  amount  of  said  subscriptions: 
Provided,  That  he  shall  cause  to  be  inserted  in  the  jour- 
nal  he  may  so  select,  a  correct  copy  of  any  decision  he 
may  deem  it  necessary  to  make  for  the  efficient  carrying 
out  of  the  school  law. 

SEC.  134.     He  shall    cause    as    many  copies   of  the 
school  laws  in  force,  with  the   forms,  regulations,  and  in-  school  laws, 
structions  herein  contemplated,  thereto   annexed,  to   be 
from  time  to  time   printed   and  distributed  among  the 
county  superintendents,  as  he  shall  deem  expedient,  and 
shall  furnish  each  county  superintendent  with  a  sufficient 
number  to  supply  each  school  officer  in   his   county  with 
one  copy,  to  be  handed  to  his  successor  in  office.     He  Distribute 
shall  also  prepare  and  cause  to  be  distributed  to  the   sev-  blanks- 
eral  county  superintendents  a  form  of  certificate  in  blank 
to  be  granted  to  teachers,  also  all  other  blank  forms  nec- 
essary to  be  used  in  carrying  out  the  school  laws. 

SEC.  135.     He  shall  annually,  on  the  first  day  of  Jan-  Report  number 
uary,  report  to  the  auditor  of  state,  the  number  of  persons 
in  each  county  between  the  ages  of  five  and  twenty-one 
years. 

SEC.  136.  He  shall  make  a  report  to  the  general  as- 
sembly,  at  each  regular  session  thereof,  which  shall  em- 
brace,  first,  a  statement  of  the  condition  of  the  common 
schools  of  the  state;  the  number  of  district  townships 
and  sub-districts  therein;  the  number  of  teachers;  the 
number  of  schools;  the  number  of  school-houses,  and  the 
value  thereof;  the  number  of  persons  between  five  and 
twenty-one  years  of  age;  the  number  of  scholars  in  each 
county  that  have  attended  school  the  previous  year,  as  re- 
turned by  the  several  county  superintendents;  the  num- 
ber of  books  in  the  district  libraries,  and  the  value  of  all 
apparatus  in  the  schools,  and  such  other  statistical  in- 
formation as  he  may  deem  important.  Second,  such  p^ted*0  be 
plans  as  he  may  have  matured  for  the  management  and 
improvement  of  the  school  fund,  and  for  the  more  perfect 
organization  and  efficiency  of  common  schools.  He  shall 
cause  one  thousand  copies  of  his  report  to  be  printed,  and 
shall  present  it  to  the  general  assembly  on  the  second 
day  of  its  session. 

SEC.  137.     Whenever  reasonable  assurances  shall-  be  Teachers1  ins 
given  by  the  county  superintendent  of  any  county  to  the  tutes< 
superintendent  of  public  instruction,  that  not  less  than 


(JO  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 

twenty  teachers  desire  to  assemble  for  the  purpose  of 
holding  a  teachers'  institute  in  said  county,  to  remain  in 
session  not  less  than  six  working  days,  he  shall  appoint 
the  time  and  place  for  said  meeting,  and  give  due  notice 
thereof  to  the  county  superintendent;  and  for  the  purpose 
of  defraying  the  expenses  of  said  institute  there  is  hereby 
appropriated  out  of  any  moneys  in  the  state  treasury  not 
otherwise  appropriated,  a  sum  not  exceeding  fifty  dollars 
annually  for  one  such  institute  in  each  county  held  as 
aforesaid,  which  the  said  superintendent  shall  immediate- 
ly transmit  to  the  county  superintendent  in  whose  county 
the  institute  shall  be  held,  who  shall  therewith  defray  the 
necessary  expenses  of  the  institute,  and  if  any  balance 
remains  he  shall  pay  the  same  into  the  county  treasury, 
and  the  same  shall  be  credited  to  the  teachers'  fund. 


EDUCATIONAL    BOARD    OF    EXAMINERS. 

SEC.  138.     There  is  hereby  created  a  state  board  of 

state  board  of    examiners,  for  the  examination  of  school  teachers,  to  be 

|™uerscre'  known  as  the  "  Educational  Board  of  Examiners ;"  said 

board  to  consist  of  the  faculty  of  the  state  university,  of 


SEC.  138.  The  state  board  of  examiners  was  organized  in  June,  1862, 
and  the  following  general  plan  for  the  a>mual  July  examination  was 
adopted  : 

I.  The  examination  to  be  a  written  one. 

II.  The  course  of  study  in  the  normil  departmsnt  of  tbe  state 
university  (which  by  law  is  made  the  standard  of  qualification)  to 
be  arranged  in  six  divisions  as  follows  :    • 

1.  Arithmetic,  algebra,  and  four  books  of  geometry. 

2.  Reading,  grammar,  rhetoric,  and  English  literature. 

3.  Descriptive,  mathematical,  and  physical  geography,  botany, 
and  geology. 

4.  Physiology,  natural  philosophy,  and  chemistry,  or  advanced 
geometry. 

5     Ancient  and  modern  history,  intellectual  and  moral  philoso- 
phy- 
6.    Theory  and  practice  of  teaching,  constitution  of  the  United 

States,  and  school  system  of  Iowa. 

III.  A  series  of  about  twenty  questions  to  be  prepared  for  each 
division ;  each  question  to  have  a  specific  value  attached,   and    tbe 
sum  of  the  values  in  each  series  to  be  one  hundred. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  61 

which  the  professor  of  the  normal  department  shall  be 
chairman,  and  the  secretary  of  the  board  of  trustees, 
ex-officio  secretary. 

SEC.  139.     The  said  board  shall  hold  an  annual  session  Annual  meeting 

c  ^  '  At       .e      ,.    tr       J  A.        n.     of  the  board  for 

of  one  week,  commencing  on  the  first  Monday  alter  the  examination  of 
fourth  of  July,  and  such  special  -sessions  as  they  may  teachers- 
deem  proper,  at  the  state  university,  at  which  sessions 
they  shall  examine  all  persons  who  make  application,  as 
to  their  qualifications  for  teaching  school  in  this  state, 
taking   as   the  standard   of  qualification    the   course   of 
study  required  in  the  normal  department  of  the  univer- 
sity. 

SEC.  140.     Said  board  shall  keep  a  record  of  their  pro-  Board  to  record 
ceedings  and  a  register  of  the  name,  age,  sex,  residence,  proceedings, &c. 
and  date  of  certificate  of  each  person  to  whom  a  certificate 
is  issued.     They  shall  also  procure  a  seal  upon  which 
shall  be  inscribed  the  words  "  ^Educational  Board  of 
"  Examiners  of  the  State  of  Iowa"  and  such  other  device 
or  sentiment  as  they  may  consider  appropriate;  and  shall 
adopt  and  cause  to  be  printed,  in  a  neat  and  legible  man- 
ner, a  form  of  certificate. 

SEC.  141.     To  ail  persons  of  good  moral  character,  who  certificates 
pass  a  satisfactory  examination   as  contemplated  in  this  teachers! 
act,  said  board  shall  issue  a  certificate  of  qualification, 
for  teaching  a  school  in  the  state  of  Iowa,  signed  by 
the  chairman  and  secretary  of  said  board,  with  the  seal 
affixed:  which  certificate  shall   authorize  the  person  to 
whom  it  is  given  to  teach  in  any  of  the  public  schools 
of  this  state,-  in  which  their  services  may  be   desired, 
without   any   further   evidence    of    qualification.       Said 


IV.  No  person  to  receive  a  certificate  from  the  board  unless  the 
sum  of  his  answers  in  each  and  every  series  equals  at  least  fifty,  and 
the  average  sum  in  all  the  series  at  least  seventy-five. 

V.  The  names  of  the  candidates  not  to  appear  upon  their  papers, 
but  to  be  enclosed  in  separate  sealed  envelopes,  which  shall  not  be 
opened  until  the  papers  have  been  examined  by  the  board  and  their 
merits  decided  upon. 

VI.  Each  candidate  to  present  from  the  county  superintendent 
of  the  county  in  which  he  resides,  a  certificate  of  good  moral  char- 
acter. 

The  certificate  granted  by  the  board  is  perpetual,  unless  revoked 
by  said  board,  and  authorizes  its  recipient  to  teach  in  any  of  the 
public  schools  of  the  state  without  further  evidence  of  qualification. 
No  charge  is  made  for  certificate  granted. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 


certificates  to    cert.ficate  shall    be   perpetual,  unless  revoked   by   said 
on5a?revoked.  board  for  gross  immorality,  or  any  other  cause  of  dis- 

qualification, of  which  cause  the  said  board  shall  be  the 
Notice  of  revo-  ju(^ges.  In  case  a  certificate  is  revoked,  said  board  shall 
cation.  cause  the  fact  to  be  published  in  two  or  more  newspapers 

published  in  this  state,  and  shall  also  report  the  same  to 

the     superintendent    of    public    instruction,   who    shall 

immediately  thereafter  notify  all  the  county  superintend- 

ents in  the  state. 

SEC.  142.     Said  board  shall  receive  no  compensation 

NO  compensa-  for  their   services.     The   expenses   incurred   for  books, 

ecu     stationery,  certificates,  seal  and  compensation  .  of  the  sec- 

retary, shall  be  allowed  arid  paid  by  the  trustees  of  the 

state  university. 


CHAPTER  TI. 


COUNTY    HIGH    SCHOOLS. 


counties  of 


schools. 


Purpose. 


on  petition  of 


SECTION.  1.  Each  county  having  a  population  of  two 
thousand  inhabitants  or  over,  as  shown  by  the  last  state 
or  federal  census,  may  establish  a  high  school  on  the 
conditions  and  in  the  manner  hereinafter  prescribed, 
f°r  the  purpose  of  affording  better  educational  facilities 
for  pupils  more  advanced  than  those  attending  district 
schools,  and  for  persons  desiring  to  fit  themselves  for  the 
vocation  of  teaching. 

SEC.  2,  When  one-third  of  the  electors  of  a  county, 
as  shown  by  the  returns  of  the  last  preceding  election, 
shall  petition  the  board  of  supervisors,  requesting  that  a 
county  high  school  be  established  in  their  county  at  the 
question  to  place  in  said  petition  named,  then  said  board  shall  give 
Smipo?  special  twenty  days'  notice  previous  to  the  next  general  election, 
or  previous  to  a  special  election  duly  called  for  that  pur- 
pose, that  they  will  submit  the  question  to  the  electors  of 
said  county  whether  such  high  school  shall  be  established  ; 
at  which  election  said  electors  shall  vote,  by  ballot,  for  or 
against  establishing  such  county  high  school.  The 
notice  contemplated  in  this  section  shall  be  given  through 
one  or  more  newspapers  published  in  said  county,  if  any 
be  published  therein,  and  by  at  least  one  written  or 
printed  notice,  to  be  posted  in  each  township. 


mit 


Notice  of  eiec 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  53 

SEO.  3.     After  said  election  the  ballots  on  said  ques-  canvass  of  elec- 
tion shall  be  canvassed  in  the  same  manner  as  in  the  tlon' 
election  for  county  officers;  and  if  a  majority  of  all  the 
votes  cast  on  said  question  shall  be  in  favor  of  establish- 
ing said  school,  the  board  of  supervisors  shall  immediate-  Board  of  super- 
ly  proceed  to  appoint  six  persons,  who  shall  be  residents  pSVu?£es. 
of  the  county,  but  not  more  than  two  of  whom  shall  be 
residents   of    the    same   township,  who   shall,  wTith   the 
county  superintendent  of  common  schools,  constitute  a 
board  of   trustees  for    said  high  school.     Each  of  said  Co.  supt.  to  be 
trustees,   appointed   as    aforesaid,    shall    hold   his   office one* 
until  his  successor  is  elected  and  qualified,  and  shall  be 
required,  within  ten  days  after  appointment,  to  qualify  by  Term,  oath  aud 
taking  the  oath  of  office,  and  giving  such  bond  as  maybe  bond- 
required  by  the  said  board  of  supervisors,  tor  the  faithful 
discharge  of  his  duties. 

SEC.  4.     At  the  next  general  election  after  said  appoint-  Election  of 
ment,  there   shall   be   elected   in    such  county  six  high  Sio^and*88" 
school  trustees,  who  shall  be  divided  into  three  classes  of terms- 
two  each;  each  class  to  hold  their  office  one,  two,  and 
three  years  respectively,  and  their  respective  terms  to  be 
decided  by  lot.     And  each  year  thereafter  there  shall  be 
two  such  trustees  elected  to  succeed  those  whose  term  is 
about  to  expire.      And    said   trustees  shall  qualify  and  Qualification  of 
enter  upon  the  duties  of  their  office  in  the  same  manner, sa 
and  at  the  said  time,  as  other  county  officers. 

SEO.  5.     The  county  superintendent  shall  be  by  virtue  co.  supt.  to  be 
of  his  office,  president  of  said  board  of  trustees ;  and  at  their  JJ^p^ntTec* 
first  meeting -in  each  year,  they  shall  appoint,  from  their  rotary  and  treas- 
own  number,  a  secretary  and  treasurer,  who  shall  perform  U1 
the  usual  duties  devolving  upon  such  officers,  for  the  term 
of  one  year,  or  until  their  successors  are  appointed  to  take 
their  places. 

SEO.  6.     At  said  meeting,  or  at  some  succeeding  meet-  Trustees  to 
ing  called  for  such  purpose,  said  truste-  s  shall  make  an  SSnndfami**6 
estimate   of  the   amount   of  funds   needed  for  building:  rate  Of  tax  re- 

f  <•  j_       ^         >  -IP  .  to  quired. 

purposes,  for  payment  of  teachers  wages,  and  for  contin- 
gent expenses,  and  they  shall  present  to  the  board  of 
supervisors  a  certified  estimate  of  the  rate  of  tax  required 
to  raise  the  amount  desired  for  such  purposes.     But  in  no  Maximum  levy- 
case  shall  the  tax  for  such  purposes  exceed,  in  any  one  p°0rsehis  pur' 
year,  the  amount  of  five  mills  on  the  dollar  on  the  tax- 
able property  of  the  county,  and,  when  the  tax  is  levied 
for   the   payment    of    teachers'    wages    and    contingent 
expenses  only,  shall  not  exceed  two  mills  on  the  dollar. 

SEC.  7.      The  said  tax  shall  be  levied  and  collected  in  collection  of 
the   same  manner  as  other  county  taxes,  and  when  col-  l 
lected  the  county  treasurer   shall  pay  the  same  to  the  treastlrer- 


64 


SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOY7A. 


treasurer  of  the  county  high  school,  in  the  same  manner 
that  school  funds  are  paid  to  the  district  treasurers  as 
required  by  law. 

SEC.  8.  The  said  treasurer  of  the  high  school  shall 
give  such  additional  bond  as  the  board  of  trustees  may 
deem  sufficient,  and  receive  all  moneys  from  the  county 
treasurer,  and  from  other  parties,  that  belong  to  the  funds 
of  said  school,  and  pay  the  same  out  only  by  direction  of 
the  board  of  trustees,  upon  orders  duly  executed  by  the 
president,  countersigned  by  the  secretary  thereof,  stating 
the  purpose  for  which  they  were  drawn.  Both  the  secre- 
tary and  treasurer  shall  keep  an  accurate  account  of  all 
moneys  received  and  expended  for  said  school ;  and  at  the 
close  of  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener  as  required  by  the 
board,  they  shall  make  a  full  statement  of  the  financial 
affairs  of  the  school. 

SEC.  9.  The  said  board  of  trustees  shall  proceed  as 
soon  as  practicable,  after  their  appointment  as  aforesaid, 
om'e^ense^to  to  select  the  best  site,  in  accordance  with  the  vote  of  the 
county,  that  can  be  obtained  without  expense  to  the  same, 


Treasurer    to 
give   additional 
bond,  and  re- 
ceive and  pay 
out  moneys. 


Secretary  and 
treasurer  to 
keep  accounts 

and  to  make 
statement. 


selection  of 


and  the  title  thereof  shall  be  vested  in  said  county.  They 
shall  then  proceed  to  make  such  purchases  of  material, 
and  to  let  such  contracts  for  their  necessary  school  build- 
ings as  they  may  deem  proper,  but  shall  not  make  any 
purchase  or  contract  in  any  year  to  exceed  the  amount  on 
hand,  and  to  be  raised  by  the  levy  of  tax  that  year. 

SEC.  10.  When  said  board  of  trustees  shall  have 
furnished  a  suitable  building  for  the  school,  they  shall 
employ  some  competent  teacher  to  take  charge  of  the 
same,  and  furnish  such  assistant  teachers  as  they  deem 
necessary,  and  provide  for  the  payment  of  their  salaries. 
Model  schools.  As  far  as  practicable,  model  schools  shall  be  encouraged  ; 
and  advanced  students  and  those  preparing  to  become 
teachers  may  be  employed  a  portion  of  their  time  in 
teaching  the  younger  pupils,  in  order  that  they  may  be- 
come familiar  with  the  practice  as  well  as  theory  of  suc- 
cessful school-teaching,  and  also  avoid,  as  far  as  practica- 
ble, the  expense  of  employing  other  assistant  teachers. 

SEC.  11.     Tuition   shall  be  free  to  all  pupils  of  such 
school  residing  in  the  county  where  the  same  is  located. 
The  board  of  trustees,  however,  shall  make  such  general 
rules  and  regulations  as  they  deem  proper  in  regard  to 
age  and  grade  of  attainments,  essential  to  entitle  pupils 
Apportionment  to  admission  in  the  school.      If  there  should  be  more  ap- 
of  pupils;         plicants  than  can  be  accommodated  at  any  time,  each  dis- 
trict shall  be  entirled  to  send  its  equal  proportion  of  pupils, 
according  to   the  number   of   scholars   it  may  have,  as 


conacts 


Maximum  of 
same. 


Employment 
and  pay  of 
teachers. 


Students  may 
teach. 


Tuition  free. 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  65 

shown  by  the  last  report  to  the  county  superintendent^  of  ^*jf ation  of 
common"  schools.       And   the  boards   of  the   respective 
school  districts  shall  designate  such  pupils  as  may  attend. 

SEC.  12.     If,  at  any  time,  the  school  can  accommodate  Pnpiisfrom 
more  pupils  than  apply  for  admission  from  that  county,  ot 
the  vacancies   may  be   filled  by   applicants  from   other 
counties,  upon  the  payment  of  such  tuition  as  the  board 
of  trustees   may  prescribe;    but  at  no   time  shall   such 
pupils  continue  in  said  school  to  the  exclusion  of  pupils 
belonging  in  the  county  in  which   such  high   school  is 
situated. 

SEC.  13.  In  any  county  where  thrre  is  no  county  high  SS5eWfiT2o 
school,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  board  of  supervisors  high  school, 
thereof,  upon  the  presentation  of  a  petition  signed  by  the 
majority  of  the  qualified  electors  of  the  county,  to  levy  a 
tax  n<>t  exceeding  one  mill  on  the  dollar  in  any  one  year, 
sufficient  to  pay  the  tuition  of  those  scholars  who  desire 
to  attend  the  county  high  school  <>f  some  other  county,  or 
a  high  school  or  high  school  department  established  in  the 
county,  and,  when  they  do  attend  such  high  school,  this 
tuition  may  be  paid  out  of  the  funds  levied  for  that  pur- 
pose. 

SEC.  14.     The  principal  of  any  such  high  school,  with  Hnies  ana  reg- 
the  approval  of  the  board  of  trustees,  shall  make  such  JchoSf  f< 
rules  and  regulations  as  he  deems  proper,  in  regard  to  the 
studies,  conduct,  and  government  of  the  pupils  under  his 
charge,  and,  if  any  such  pup;ls  will  not  conform  to,  and  fa*™ityfor  ™" 
obey,  the  rules  of  the  school,  they  may  be  suspended  or 
expelled  therefrom  by  the  board  of  trustees. 

SEC.  15.     Tne  said  board  of  tru>tees  shall   annually  ^tees^ 
make  a  report  to  the  board  of  supervisors  of  their  county,  report;  what  to 
which  shall  specify  the  number  of  students,  both  male  cc 
and  female,  who  have  been  in  attendance  at  the  county 
high  school  during  the  year,  the  branches  of  learning 
taught,  the  text-books  used,  the  number  of  teachers  em- 
ployed, the  amount  of  salary  paid  to  them,  the  amount 
expended  for  library  and  apparatus  and  for  buildings  and 
all  other  expenses;  also  the  amount  of  funds  on  hand,  H^22iJS[15 
debts  unpaid,  and  other  information  deemed  important  or  copy  Sent  to 
expedient  to  report.      Said  report  shall  be  printed  in  at  fnSuc 
least  one  newspaper  in  the  county,  if  any  is  published 
therein,  and  a  copy  of  the  report  shall  be  forwarded  to  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

SEC.  16.     The  board  of  supervisors  shall  have  power  Vacancies, 
to  fill  any  vacancy  that  may  occur  in  the  board  of  trustees 
of  that  county,  by  appointment,  until  the  next  general 

69 


66  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 

Quorum  of  election,  and  a  majority  of  any  such  board  of  trustees 
shall  be  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business. 

SEC.  17.     The  board  of  supervisors  may  allow  each 

Pay  of  trustees,  member  of  the  board  of  trustees  the  sum  of  two  dollars 
per  utiy  a  or  tiiC  iiiiiO  £ictUc*lly  t-i'iipiC/yovi  i'a  tli6  vliodicirgc 
of  his  official  duties,  and  when  such  accounts  are  pre- 
sented for  payment,  they  shall  be  audited  and  paid  out  of 
the  county  treasury,  in  the  same  manner  as  other  accounts 
against  the  county,  and  said  trustees  shall  not  be  entitled 
to  any  further  remuneration  for  services  or  expenses. 


CHAPTEK    III. 

STATE      UNIVERSITY. 

SEO.  1.     The  objects  of  the  state  university,  established 
objects  of  the    by   the   constitution    at  Iowa  City,  shall   be  to  provide 
the  best  and  most  efficient  means  of  imparting  to  young 
men  and  young  women  on  equal   terms,  a  liberal   educa- 
tion, and  thorough  knowledge  of  the   different   branches 
of  literature,  the  arts  and  sciences,  with  their  varied  appli- 
courses  of      cations.     The  university,  so  far  as  practicable,  shall  begin 
begin'  where  to  tne  courses  of  study,  in  its  collegiate  and  scientific  depart- 
ments, at  the  points  where  the  same  are  completed  in  high 
schools;  and  no  students  shall  be  admitted  who  have  not 
previously  completed    the  elementary   studies,   in   such 
branches  as  are  taught  in  the  common  schools  throughout 
the  state. 

Not  to  be  under      SEC.  2.     The  university 'shall  never  be  under  the  ex- 

afcontrottion    elusive  control  of  any  religious  denomination  whatever. 

SEC.  3.     The  university  shall  be  governed  by  a  board 

Government,     of  regents,  consisting  of  the  governor  of  the   state,  who 

Board  of  re-       shall  be  president  of  the  board  by  virtue  of  his  office,  and 

fitfon.'  compo"   the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  and  the  president 

of  the   university,  who   shall  also  be  members  by  virtue 

of  their  respective  offices,  together  with  one  person  from 

HOW  chosen,     each  congressional  district  of  the   state,  who  shall  be 

by  the  elected  general  assembly. 

SEO.  4.     The  members  of  said  board  shall  be  divided 
Members  to  be  into  three  classes.     The  number  in  each  class,  as  the  con- 
gressional districts  of  the  state  increase,  shall  be  kept  as 
nearly  equal  as   practicable,  and  the  members  of  each 
class  shall  hold   office  for  the  term  of    six   years    from 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA. 


their  election,  and  until  their  successors   are   elected  and  classes  to  he 
qualified.      The  general  assembly   shall   elect  members  kept  equal* 
every  two  years,  as  the  terms  of  office  of  the  respective  Future  eiec 
classes  expire.     The  board  of  regents  shall  fill  all  vacan-  tlons* 
cies  occurring  therein,  excepc  when  the  legislature  is  in  Vacancies. 
session,  and   the  persons  so  appointed   shall  hold   their 
offices  until  the  next  session  of  the  general  assembly. 

SEC.  5.     The   university    shall    include   a    collegiate,  Departments. 
scientific,  normal,  law,  and  such  other  departments,  with 
siich  courses  of   instruction  and  elective  studies,  as  the  £ectlve  8tucl" 
board  of   regents   may  determine;  and  the  board  shall 
have  authority  to  confer  such   degrees,  and  grant  such  Board  mav  COB 
diplomas  and  other  marks  of  distinction  as  are  usually  fe 
conferred  and  granted  by  other  universities. 

SEC.  6.     The  meetings  of  the  board  of  regents  shall  Meetings,  regu- 
be  held  at  rach    times  as  the  board  may  appoint.     The  la 
president  of  the  board  may  call  special  meetings  when  he 
deems  it  expedient,  or  special  meetings  may  be  called  by 
any  three  members  of  the  board. 

SEC.  7.     An  executive  committee,  consisting  of  three  Executive  com- 
competent  and  responsible  persons,   shall  be  appointed  appoSted^to 
by  the  board  of  regents,  who  shall  audit  all  claims,  and  Sep^c^d8  ;  to 
whose  chairman  shall  draw  all  orders  for  such  audited  &M  submit' 
claims  on  the  treasurer,  but  before  payment  such  orders  &s 
shall  be  countersigned  by  the  secretary.     Said  committee 
shall  keep  a  specific  and  complete  record  of  all  matters 
involving  the  expenditure  of  money,  which  record  shall 
be  submitted  to   the   board  of  regents  at  each  regular 
meeting  of  the  same. 

SEO.  8.     The  board  of  regents    shall  elect  a  secretary  secretory,  eie«- 
who  shall  hold  his  office  at  the  pleasure  of  the  board.     It  of?"  ' 
shall  be  his  duty  to  record  all  the  proceedings  of  the  board 
of  regents,   and  carefully  to   preserve  all   its  books  and 
papers.     His  books  shall  exhibit   what   parts  of  the  uni- 
versity  lands  have  been  sold,  when   the   same  were  sold, 
and  at  what  price,  and  to  whom,  on  what  terms,  what  por- 
tion of  the  purchase-money  has  been  paid,  and  when  paid  ^f  permanent 
on  each  sale,  how   much   is  due   on  each  sale,  by  whom 
and  how  secured,   and  when  payable,  what  lands  remain 
unsold,  where  situated,  and  their  appraised  value,  if  ap- 
praised, or  their  estimated  value,  if  not  appraised.     His  TO  enter  sales. 
books  shall   also  show  how   the  permanent   fund  of  the 
university  has  been  invested,  the  amount  of  each  kind  of 
stocks,  it  any,  with  the  date  thereof,  and  when  due,  and 
the  interest   thereon,  and  when   and   where  payable,  the 
amount  of  each  loan,  if  any,  and  when  made,  and  pay- 
able to  whom,  and  how  secured,  and  at  what  interest,  and 


68  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA 

when  and  where  payable.  When  any  further  sales  of 
laucte,  or  further  instruments  shall  be  made,  the  secretary 
shall  enter  the  same  upon  his  books  as  above  set  forth. 

TO  countersign  The  secretary  shall  countersign  ai;d  register  all  orders  for 

orders?1*  money  on  the  treasurer,  and  the  treasurer  shall  not  pay 
any  order  on  him  for  money,  unless  the  same  be  counter- 
signed by  the  secretary. 

SEC.  9.     The  board  of  regents  shall  elect  a   treasurer, 

Treasurer,  eiec-  who  shall  hold  his  office  at  the  pleasure  of  the  board.     It 

t  ion  and  duiy.i  g^i  ^G  j^g  ^y  as  treasurer  to  keep  a  true  and  faithful 
account  of  all  moneys  received  and  paid  out  by  him,  and 
before  entering  upon  the  duties  of  his  office  he  shall  take 
and  subscribe  an  oath  that  he  will  faithfully  perform  the 

Bond.  duties  of  treasurer;  and  he  shall  also  give  a  bond  in  the 

penalty  of  fifty  thousand  dollars  conditioned  for  the  faith- 
ful discharge  of  his  duties  as  treasurer,  and  that  he  will 
at  all  times  keep  and  render  a  true  account  of  moneys 
received  by  him  as  such  treasurer,  and  of  the  disposition 
he  has  made  of  the  same,  and  that  he  will  at  all  times  be 
ready  to  discharge  himself  of  the  trust,  and  to  pay  over 

Approval.  when  required  ;  which  bond  shall  have  two  or  more  good 
sureties,  and  shall  be  approved,  as  to  its  form  and  the 
sufficiency  of  its  sureties,  by  the  board  of  regents  ard 

Filed  with  sec-  also  the  auditor  and   secretary  of  state,  and  shall  be  filed 

retary  of  state. 


SEC.  10.     The  treasurer  of  the  university  shall  have  a 

Treasurer  to      set  °^  books,  in  which  he  shall  keep  an  accurate  account 

onandsC°unt8    °^  a^  transactions  relative  to  the  sale  and  disposition  of 

university  lands,  and  the  management  of  the  fund  arising 

therefrom;  which  books  shall  exhibit  what  parts  and  por- 

tions of  land  have  been  sold,  at  what  prices  and  to  whom, 

and  how  the  proceeds   have  been  invested,  and  on  what 

securities,  and  what    lands   still  remain  unsold,  where 

situated,  and  of  what  value  respectively. 

SEC.  11.  The  treasurer  shall,  on  the  first  day  of  June 
Notify  persons  and  December  of  each  year,  notify  in  writing  each  per- 
son in  default  of  payment  of  either  principal  or  interest  of 
funds  loaned  by  or  due  to  the  university,  and  shall  cause 
suit  to  be  commenced  against  such  delinquents,  when 
in  his  judgment  the  best  interest  of  the  institution  re- 
quires. 

SEC.  12.  The  board  of  regents  shall  enact  laws  for 
nmvof  the  the  government  of  the  university,  and  shall  appoint  a 
president  and  the  requisite  professors  and  tutors,  together 
with  such  other  officers  as  they  may  deem  expedient,  and 
shall  determine  the  salaries  of  'such  officers,  the  compen- 
sation of  the  secretary  and  treasurer,  and  the  amount  of 


SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  (J9 


fees  to  be  paid  for  tuition.     They  shall  remove  any  officer 
connected  with  the  university,  when  in  their  judgment  »i  of  officers. 
the  good  of  the  institution  requires  it. 

SEC.  13.     The  board  of  regents  is  authorized  to  expend  Apparatus. 

.,    ,,        .  top    ,,  .  .,      r        i    r        .,  library,  etc. 

such  portion  ot  the  income  of  the  university  fund,  as  it 
may  deem  expedient  in  the  purchase  of  apparatus,  libra- 
ry, and  cabinet  of  natural  history,  in  providing  suitable 
means  to  keep  and  preserve  the  same,  and  in  procuring 
all  other  necessary  facilities  for  giving  instruction-. 

SEC.  14.  All  specimens  of  natural  history,  and  geo-  {Jaf  history****" 
logical  and  mineralogical  specimens,  which  are  or  here- 
after may  be  collected  by  the  state  geologist  of  Iowa,  or 
by  any  others  appointed  by  the  state  to  investigate  its 
natural  history  and  physical  resources,  shall  belong  to 
and  be  the  property  of  the  state  university,  and  shall 
form  a  part  of  its  cabinet  of  natural  history,  which  shall 
be  under  the  charge  of  the  professor  of  that  department. 

SEO.  15.   No  sales  of  lands  belonging  to  the  university  gj'gSSf  **11' 
shall  take  place  unless  the  same  shall  be  decided  upon  at 
a  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  regents,  or  at  one  called 
for  that  particular  purpose,  and  then  only  in  the  manner, 
upon  the  notice,  and  on  the  terms  which  the  board  shall 
prescribe;  and  no  member  of  the  board  shall  be  either  Members  and 
directly  or  indirectly  interested  in  any  purchase  of  such  ™tT<Tbf  iXrd 
lands  upon  sale,  nor  shall  the  secretary  or  treasurer  be  so  ested  in  sales. 
interested.     It  shall  be  lawful  for  the  board  to  invest  any 
portion  of  the  permanent  endowment  fund  not  otherwise 
invested,  as  well  as  any  surplus  income  which  is  not  imme- 
diately required  for  other  purposes,  in  United  States'  stocks  Jn^stment  of 
or  stocks  of  the  state  of  Iowa,  or  by  note  and  mortgage 
on  unencumbered  real  estate  the  value  of  which,  after  de- 
ducting the  value  of  all  perishable  improvements  thereon, 
shall  be  double  the  amount  of  the  sum  loaned,  and  hold 
the  same  for  the  university,  either  as  a  permanent  fund  or 
as  an  income  to  defray  current  expenses  as  said  board  of  Permanentfund 
regents  may  deem  expedient.       It  shall  not  be  lawful  for  not  to  be  U8e<* 

T     J  *    ,.  [.  ^  ,    n       T    «       .1       for  expenses  of 

the  board  to  use  any  portion  ot  the  permanent  tuna  tor  me  institution; 
ordinary  expenses  of  the  institution. 

SEO.  16.     The  president  of  the  university  shall  make  a  president  to  re 
report  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  September,  preceding  the  port  to  board< 
meeting  of  the  general  assembly,  to  the  board  of  regents, 
which  shall  exhibit  the  condition  and  progress  of  the  insti- 
tution in  its  several  departments,  the  different  courses  of 
study  pursued  theirein,  the  branches  taught,  the  means 
and  methods  of  instruction  adopted,  the  number  of  stu- 
dents, with  their  names,  classes,  and  residences,  and  such 
other  matters  as  he  may  deem  proper  to  communicate. 


70 


SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA. 


Report-  what 


SEC.  17.  The  board  of  regents  shall,  on  the  first  day 
Board  to  report  of  October  preceding  each  regular  meeting  of  the  general 
instruction!  1C  assembly,  make  a  report  to  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction,  which  report,  with  that  of  the  president  of  the 
sup.  pub.  inst.  university,  shall  be  embodied  in  the  said  superintendent's 
in  hT6br^rtme  report  to  the  general  assembly.  The  report  of  the  board 
of  regents  shall  contain  the  number  of  professors,  tutors 
and  other  officers,  with  the  compensation  of  each,  the 
condition  of  the  university  fund,  and  the  income  derived 
therefrom,  the  amount  of  expenditures  and  the  items 
thereof,  with  such  other  information  and  recommenda- 
tions as  they  may  deem  expedient  to  lay  before  the  gen- 
eral assembly. 

SEO.  18.  The  regents  shall  receive  no  compensation 
exceP^  ^or  mileage  in  traveling  to  and  from  the  meetings 
Qj?  ^  J-JQ^  .  whicn  shall  be  at  the  same  rate,  and  com- 
puted in  the  same  manner,  as  the  mileage  allowed  to 
members  of  the  general  assembly.  The  auditor  of  state 
is  hereby  authorized  to  audit  and  allow  the  claims  for 
such  attendance,  for  not  more  than  three  meetings  an- 
nually. 


Auditor  to 


BLANK    FORMS. 


NUMBER  1. 

Form  for  Notice  of  an  election  in  new  townships  or  where  a  district  is  left  witfwut 

officers. 

[See  sections  2  and  3,  Chapter  1.] 

Notice  is  hereby  given  to  the  qualified  electors  of  district  township  of 

in  the  county  of and  state  of  Iowa,  that  an  election,  for  one 

sub-director  in  each  of  the  sub-districts  of  said  district  township,  will  be  held  on 
the day  of 18 ...  at  ....  o'clock,  as  follows : 

In  sftb-district  No.  1,  at 

In  sub-district  No.  2,  at 

In  sub-district  No.  3,  at 

Dated 18 

A B 

C D 

E F 

Trustees  of township. 

NOTE. — At  least  three  of  the  above  notices  should  be  posted  in  each  sub-dis- 
trict, at  least  five  days  previous  to  the  election,  and  such  hour  should  be  desig- 
nated for  the  meeting  (not  earlier  than  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,)  as  will  best  suit  the 
convenience  of  the  people.  In  case  there  is  but  one  sub-district,  give  the  notice 
for  the  election  of  three  sub-directors  instead  of  one.  In  case  there  are  two 
sub-districts,  give  the  notice  for  the  election  in  each  sub-district  of  one  sub- 
director  for  that  sub-district,  nnd  one  sub-director  at  large ;  and  in  case  of  an 
independent  di  trie',  give  the  notice  lor  the  election  oi  a  president,  treasurer,  and 
six  (or  three)  dilvciors.  The  meetings  should  organize  as  provided  in  section  9, 
Chapter  1. 


NUMBER  2. 

Form  for  Proceedings  of  district  township  meeting. 
[See  section  7,  Chapter  1.] 

March 18, 

The  electors  of  district  township  of in  the  county  of , 


72  BLANK    FORMS. 

and  state  of  Iowa,  assembled  pursuant  to  previous  notice.    The  meeting  was 

called  to  order  by  the  president.    The  secretary  being  absent,  A B 

was  appointed  secretary  pro  tern. 

The  order  of  business  was  stated  by  the  president. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  E a  tax  of  four  hundred  dollars  was  voted  for  the 

piyment  of  debts  for  school-house  purposes. 

Mr.  G moved  that  a  tax  of  fifteen  hundred  dollars  be  voted  for  the 

purpose  of  raising  the   respective  amounts  asked  for  by  the  sub-districts  for 

school-house  purposes.    Mr.  H moved  to  amend  by  striking  out  "  fifteen 

\undred  dollars,"  and  inserting  "  two  thousand  dollars,"  which  was  agreed  to, 
-va  1  the  motion  as  amended  was  decided  in  the  affirmative. 

.lr.  K moved  that  a  tax  of  fifty  dollars  be  voted  for  the  purchase  of 

fflrary.    Mr.  F moved  to  amend  by  striking  out  "  fifty  dollars,"  and  in- 
serting "  one  hundred  dollars,"  which  motion  was  lost. 

Mr.  L then  moved  to  strike  out  "  fifty  dollars,"  and  insert  "  seventy- 
five  dollars,"  which  was  agreed  to,  and  the  original  motion  as  amended,  was 
decided  in  the  affirmative. 

Mr.  H moved  that  the  various  powers  conferred  by  law  on  the  district 

meeting,  be  delegated  to  the  board  of  directors.    Alter  a  lengthy  discussion,  the 
vote  was  taken,  and  the  motion  was  lost. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  E ,  the  meeting  adjourned  sine  die. 

C D , 

President. 

A B , 

Secretary. 

NOTE. — The  foregoing  form  is  presented  with  the  hope  of  aiding  the  inexpe- 
rienced. Those  who  are  familiar  with  such  duties,  may  adopt  or  vary  it  as  may 
seem  best.  The  essential  point  is,  to  have  the  proceedings  of  the  district  accu- 
rately recorded.  Much  depends  upon  the  minutes  of  the  district  meeting,  and 
hence  they  should  be  correctly  kept,  and  carefully  preserved.  It  will  be  seen  in  the 
foregoing  proceedings  that  the  district  has  voted  for  the  "  school-house  fund " 
two  thousand  four  hundred  dollars,  and  seventy-five  dollars  for  the  purchase  of 
library,  and  the  secretary  should  certify  to  the  clerk  of  the  board  of  supervisors 
accordingly. 


NUMBER  3. 

Form  of  Notice  of  annual  meeting  in  sub-districts. 
[See  section  8,  Chapter  1.] 

Notice  is  hereby  given,  that  a  meeting  of  the  qualified  electors  of  sub-district, 

No ,  of  district  township  of ,  in  the  county  of  ,  and 

state  of  Iowa,  will  be  heltf  at    on  the  first  Monday  in  March,  18. ... 


BLANK    FORMS.  73 

at o'clock,  for  the  election  of  one  sub-director,  and  the  transaction  of  such 

other  business  as  may  legally  come  before  it. 

Dated 18.... 

A B 

Sub  director  of  sub-district  No 

NOTE. — In  case  there  is  no  sub  director,  the  above  notice  must  be  given  by 
the  secretary  of  the  district  township.  It  must  be  given  five  days  previous  to 
the  meeting,  and  posted  in  at  least  three  public  places  in  the  sub-district.  The 
notice  should  designate  the  hour  of  meeting,  (which  should  not  be  earlier  than 
9  o'clock,  A.  M.,)  distinguishing  between  forenoon  and  afternoon. 


NUMBER  4. 

Form  of  Proceedings  of  annual  sub-district  meeting. 
[See  sections  8,  9,  and  11,  Chapter  1.] 

March ,18.... 

The  electors  of  sub-district  No ,  of  district  township  of ,  in 

the  county  of ,  and  state  of  Iowa,  met  pursuant  to  previous  notice. 

A B was  appointed  chairman,  and  C D was 

appointed  secretary  of  the  meeting. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  E ,  the  meeting  proceeded  to  elect  one  sub-director  by 

ballot.  Mr.  F H having  received  a  majority  (or  plurality,  as  the 

case  may  be)  of  all  the  votes  cast,  was  declared  duly  elected  sub-director  for  the 
ensuing  year. 

Mr.  G offered  the  following  resolution  : 

Resolved,  That  the  district  township  be  requested  to  vote  a  tax  on  the  taxable 
property  of  the  district  township  of  five  hundred  dollars  for  the  erection  of  a 
school-house  in  this  sub-district. 
After  some  discussion,  the  resolution  was  adopted. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  R ,  the  meeting  adjourned  sine  die. 

A B , 

Chairman. 
C..  .   D.. 


NOTE. — The  amounts  voted  by  the  sub-district  must  be  certified  by  the  sub- 
director  to  the  electors  of  the  district  township  at  their  next  regular  meeting 
thereafter. 
slO 


74  BLANK   FORMS. 

NUMBER  5. 

Form  of  Certificate  of  election  of  sub-director. 
[See  section  9,  Chapter  1.] 

We  hereby  certify  that,  at  the  annual  meeting  of  sub-district  No 

of  district  township  of ,  in  the  county  of ,  and  state  of 

Iowa,  held  on  the  first  Monday  in  March,  18 . . . .,  A B was 

duly  elected  sub-director  for  said  sub-district  the  ensuing  year. 

C D 

Chairman. 
E P 

Secretary. 

NOTE. — This  certificate  slightly  varied,  will  answer  in  case  of  the  election  of  a 
sub-director  at  a  called  meeting,  as  per  notice  in  Form  No.  1.  In  both  cases,  it 
should  be  presented  by  the  sub-director  elect,  to  the  board  of  directors  of  the 
district  township,  and  filed  with  the  president  of  said  district. 


NUMBER  6. 

Form  of  oath  of  sub-director. 
[See  section  46,  Chapter  1.] 

You  do  solemnly  swear  (or  affirm,  as  the  case  may  be,)  that  you  will  support  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  the  constitution  of  the  state  of  Iowa,  and 
that  you  will  faithfully  and  impartially  discharge  the  duties  of  sub-director  of 

sub-district  No of  district  township  of ,  in  the  county  of 

and  state  of  Iowa,  according  to  law  and  the  best  of  your  abilities. 

NOTE. — The  above  is  the  form  of  the  oath  when  taken  orally.  Section  561, 
Revision  1860,  requires,  in  case  the  oflijer  gives  bond,  that  the  oath  shall  be  in- 
dorsed thereon.  See  Form  No.  28. 


NUMBER  7. 

Form  of  Certificate  of  sub-director  to  district  secretary. 
[See  section  11,  Chapter  1.] 

To  A B , 

Secretary  of  district  township  of 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  electors  of  sub-district  No of  district  town- 
ship of ,  in  the  county  of and  state  of  Iowa,  at  the  annual 


BLANK   FORMS.  75 

meeting,  held  on  the  first  Monday  in  March,  18 voted  the  sum  of  five 

hundred  dollars  for  the  erection  of  a  school-house  in  said  sub  district. 

C..  .  D.. 


NUMBER  8. 

Form  for  Proceedings  of  meeting  of  the  board   of  directors  for  division  of  district 
township  into  sub-districts. 

[See  section  24,  Chapter  1.] 

.  18.. 


At  a  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  district  township  of 

in  the  county  of and  state  of  Iowa,  held  this  day,  said  district 

township  was  divided  into  sub-districts  as  follows : 

Sub-district  No.  1,  to  consist  of  sections  one,  two,  three,  ten,  eleven,  and 
twelve;  and  the  north-east  quarter  of  the  north-east  quarter,  and  fractional  lots 
ooe  and  two  of  section  four,  and  fractional  lots  one  and  two  of  section  nine,  in 
township  82,  north  of  rartge  6  west. 

Sub-district  No.  2,  to  consist  of  the  west  half,  and  the  south-east  quarter,  and 
the  west  half  of  the  north-east  quarter,  and  fractional  lots  one  and  two  of  section 
five  ;  and  fractional  lot  three  of  section  four  ;  and  sections  six,  seven,  and  eight ; 
and  fractional  lots  three,  four,  and  five  of  section  nine,  in  township  82,  north  of 
range  6  west. 

Sub-district  No.  3,  to  consist  of  the  west  half,  and  the  south-east  quarter,  and 
fractional  lots  one  and  two  of  section  sixteen  ;  and  sections  seventeen,  eighteen* 
nineteen,  twenty,  twenty-one,  and  fractional  lots  two,  three,  four,  and  five  of 
section  twenty -two,  in  township  82,  north  of  range  6  west. 

Sub-district  No.  4,  to  consist  of  sections  thirteen  and  fourteen ;  and  the  east 
half  and  east  half  of  the  north-west  quarter,  and  lots  one,  two,  and  three  of  sec- 
tion fifteen  ;  and  fractional  lot  one  of  section  twenty-two  ;  and  the  east  half,  and 
the  north-west  quarter,  and  fractional  lots  three  and  four  of  section  twenty- 
three  ;  and  section  twenty-four,  and  the  east  half  and  the  north-west  quarter,  and 
fractional  lots  three,  four,  and  five  of  section  twenty-five  ;  and  fractional  lot  one, 
of  section  twenty-six,  in  township  82,  north  of  range  6  west. 

Sub-district  No.  5,  to  consist  of  the  west  half,  and  the  south-east  quarter,  and 
fractional  lots  two  and  three  of  section  twenty-six  ;  and  sections  twenty-seven, 
thirty-four,  thirty-five,  and  thirty-six,  in  township  82,  north  of  range  6  west. 

Sub-district  No.  6,  to  consist  of  sections  twenty-e'ght,  twenty -nine,  thirty 
thirty-one,  thirty -two,  and  thirty-three,  in  township  82,  north  of  range  6  west. 

A B 

President. 
C D 

Secretary. 


76  ELANK    FORMS. 

NOTE.— In  the  foregoing  sketch  I  have  imagined  a  district  township  composed 
of  a  congressional  township,  which  is  divided  by  a  stream  that  has  been  regu- 
larly meandered  by  the  government  surveyors,  and  thus  the  township  is  rendered 
partially  fractional.  The  stream  forms  the  boundary  line  of  one  side  of  all  the 
sub-districts  but  one.  This  may  be  done  in  all  cases  of  meandered  streams,  but 
where  they  have  not  been  meandered,  the  government  lines  cross  them,  and  the 
sub-district  lines  must  conform. accordingly.  The  phrase  "  congressional  divis- 
ions of  land,"  I  understand  to  mean  any  tract  of  land  which  the  United  States 
will  sell  separate  and  apart  from  an  adjoining  tract.  Hence  an  eighty  or  forty 
acre  tract,  or  any  irregular  tract  of  three,  five,  or  of  a  greater  or  less  number  of 
acres,  which  appears  on  the  government  plats  as  a  separate  and  distinct  tract,  may 
be  included  or  excluded  from  a  sub-district,  as  the  board  of  directors,  in  their 
discretion  may  think  best.  There  must  also  be  a  plat  made  of  the  sub-districts, 
in  accordance  with  the  division  made  by  the  board.  The  plan  of  division  must 
be  recorded  in  the  district  records,  and  an  attested  copy  uf  the  record  and  plat 
should  be  filed  with  the  clerk  of  the  board  of  supervisors,  and  also  with  the 
county  treasurer. 


NUMBER  9. 

Form  for  Certificate  of  secretary  to  the  board  of  supervisors,  of  the  amount  of  tax 
voted  by  the  board  of  directors. 

[See  section  29,  Chapter  1.] 

To  the  Board  of  Supervisors  of. County,  Iowa  : 

I  hereby  certify  that  a  tax  of. dollars  was  this  day  voted 

by  the  board  of  directors  on  the  taxable  property  of  district  township  of 

,  in  the  county  of. and  state  of  Iowa,  for  the  use  of  the 

teachers'  fund,   and    dollars  for  the  contingent  fund,  as 

provided  in  section  29,  of  chapter  1,  of  the  School  Laws. 


A B , 

Sec'y  of  district  township  of 

Dated, ,  18 

NOTE. — The  tax  levied  for  teachers'  fund  and  contingent  fund  is  to  be  uniform 
throughout  the  district  township,  and  must  be  determined  by  the  board  of  direc- 
tors at  their  regular  meeting  on  the  third  Monday  in  March,  or  at  a  special 
meeting  between  that  time  and  the  third  Monday  in  May,  except  as  contempla- 
ted in  the  proviso  of  section  29,  when  an  additional  amount  may  be  levied  on  the 
property  of  any  sub-district  in  which  the  electors  have  voted  to  carry  on  the 
schools  therein  for  a  longer  time  than  the  twenty-four  weeks  provided  by  law, 
and  exceeding  the  time  provided  for  by  the  boarJ. 


BLANK    FORMS.  77 

NUMBER  10. 

Form  of  Draft  of  district  president  on  county  treasurer. 
[See  section  32.  Chapter  1.] 

,,  18.... 


To  A B ,  County  Treasurer  : 

Pay  to  C D ,   treasurer  of  district  township   of , 

in  the  county  of. .  '. ,  and  state  of  Iowa,  the  amount  of  taxes  levied  and 

collected  on  account  of  said  district  for  teachers'  fund,  contingent  fund,  and 

school  house  fund,  up  to  the  first  Monday  of ,18  ... 

E F 

President. 
G H 

Secretary. 

NOTE. —  The  district  treasurer  should  present  this  draft  in  person,  and  note 
carefully  the  amount  of  money  drawn  on  account  of  each  fund,  and  charge  him- 
self accordingly. 


NUMBER  11. 

Form  f>f  Order  of  district  president  on  district  treasurer. 
|See  sections  41  and  42,  Chapter  1.] 

No ,18.... 

To  A B ,  Treasurer  of  district  township  of. 

Pay  C D or  order,  the  sum  of dollars  out  of 

the  [school-house]  fiicd,  for  [as  for  example;  labor  performed  and  materials  fur- 
nished in  the  erection  of  a  school-house  in  sub-district  number of  district 

township  of. ,  in  the  county  of ,  and  state  of  Iowa, 

as  per  contract  made  with  the  sub-director  of  said  sub-district,  on  the 

day  of ,18....] 

$ E F , 

President. 
G  H , 

Secretary. 

NOTE. — Whenever  an  order  is  drawn,  it  should  be  registered,  as  per  Form 
Number  12,  and  the  number,  date,  in  whose  favor  drawn,  on  what  fund,  for  what 
purpose, and  the  amount,  snould  immediately  be  certified  by  the  secretary  to  the 
treasurer  of  the  district.  The  above  form  will  answer  for  an  order  on  the 
teachers'  fund,  by  substituting  the  words  "  out  of  the  teachers'  fund  for  services 
as  school  teacher  in  sub-district,"  or  on  the  contingent  fund,  by  substituting  the 
words  "  cut  of  the  contingent  fund,  for  fuel,  repairs,  etc." 


78  BLANK    FORMS. 

NUMBER  12. 

Form  of  Order  Register,  of  secretary  and  treasurer. 


No.  j       D^c.       jl  i  vviiojv:  t'avor  drawn  [      Fund.       jPorv,  HSe.j 


No.  1 
No.  2 
No.  3 
No.  4 
No.  5 

April  7,  1872 
April  7,  1872 
April  7,  1872 
May  10,  1872 
May  14,  1872 

John  Smith. 
\.  J.  A'^ams. 
Joel  B.  Young. 
Pbos.  Harrisou. 
Sirah  Johnson. 

Teachers'. 
Contingent. 
Contingent. 
School-house 
Teachers'. 

Teaching  school. 
Rep.  on  8.  house. 
Fuel. 
Erec.  of  8.  house. 
Teaching  school. 

$45  00 
15  00 
5  00 
125  00 

03  74 

Nt)TE. — The  above  form  is  presented  with  a  view  of  systemizing  the  matter  of 
drawing  and  paying  school  orders.  It  is  impossible  to  keep  a  correct  amount  of 
orders  without  some  such  method,  and  it  is  particularly  essential  under  the 
present  law,  which  requires  the  treasurer  to  make  pro  rata  payments  when  he  has 
not  sufficient  funds  to  pay  in  full.  This  register  should  be  kept  by  both  the 
secretary  and  treasurer ,  the  one  kept  by  the  latter  being  an  exact  copy  of  that 
kept  by  the  former,  and  this  may  be  easily  done  if  each  order,  when  drawn,  is 
promptly  certified  by  the  secretary  to  the  treasurer.  Thus  each  officer  will  at  all 
times  be  advised  of  the  exact  number  and  amouut  of  outstanding  orders.  When 
an  order  is  paid  in  full,  cause  the  person  presenting  it,  in  all  cases,  to  indorse  it ; 
and  if  an  order  is  drawn  in  favor  of  one  person  and  presented  by  another,  refute 
payment  unless  it  is  properly  indorsed.  In  making  partial  payment*,  indorse  the 
amount  paid  with  the  date  of  payment  on  the  back  of  the  order,  and  take  a 
receipt  for  the  amount  paid,  which  will  be  your  voucher  in  a  settlement  with  the 
board.  I  deem  this  receipt  essential — otherwise  the  treasurer  has  nothing  to 
show  what  disposition  he  has  made  of  the  money. 


NUMBER  13. 

Form  of  Notice  of  regular  district  township  meeting. 
[See  section  6,  and  35,  Chapter  1.] 

Notice  is  hereby  given  to  the  qualified  electors  of  district  township  of 

in  the  county  of ,  and  state  of  Iowa,  that  the  regular  meeting  of  said 

district  will  be  held  at on  the  second  Monday,  in  March,  18. . .,  at. . . 

o'clock  . . .  .M.  for  the  transaction  of  such  business  as  may  legally  come  before  it. 

A B , 

Secretary  of  district  township  of 

Dated, ,18.... 

NOTE. — The  above  notice  must  be  posted  in  five  different  conspicuous  p^cesin 
the  district.  In  independent  districts,  insert  immediately  after  the  word  "  for  "  in 
the  concluding  part  of  the  notice,  the  words  "  the  election  of  officers  and"  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  provisions  of  section  98,  chapter  1.  The  law  provides  for  or.ly 


BLANK    FORMS.  7Q 

one  regular  meeting^  in  the  district  in  each  year,  and  no  authority  is  given  for 
calling  a  special  meeting  in  an  organized  district,  except  in  independent  districts, 
and  then  only  for  the  election  of  officers,  or  to  determine  the  question  of  issuing 
bonds. 

In  all  eases  the  meeting  should  be  caiicu  at  such  hour  as  will  beat  &uli  the  con- 
venience ot  the  people,  and  not  earlier  than  9  o'clock,  A.  M  ,  and  can  not  be  per- 
manently adjourned  before  12  o'clock,  M.  In  independent  districts  the  polls  must 
remain  open  from  9  A.  M.,  to  4  P.  M.  (See  section  93 ) 


NUMBER  14. 

Form  of  Certificate  of  secretary  to  the  board  of  supervisors  of  the  amount  of  tax 
voted  by  the  district  township. 

[See  sections  12,  28,  and  38,  Chapter  1.] 

.  18.. 


To  tJie  Board  of  Supervisors  of County,  Iowa, : 

I  hereby  certify  that  at  a  meeting  of  the  qualified  electors  of  district  township 

of in  the  county  of and  state  of  Iowa,  held  on  the 

second  Monday  in  March,  18. ...  a  t&x  was  voted  on  the  taxable  property  of  said 

district  of dollars  on  account  of  school-house  fund  ;  and  that 

the  tax  on  account  of  school-house  fund  has  been  apportioned  by  the  board  of 
directors  among  the  sub-districts  of  said  district  township,  as  follows: 

In  sub-district  No.  1, , dollars. 

In  sub-district  No.  2, dollars. 

In  sub  district  No.  3, dollars. 

In  sub-district  No.  4, dollars. 

In  sub-district  No.  5, dollars. 


I  also  certify  that  the  board  of  directors  have  voted  a  tax  of 

dollars  for  teachers'  fund,  and    dollars  for  contingent  fund. 

I      }  A B 

Secretary  of  district  township  of 


NOTE. — The  tax  for  contirgent  fund  must  be  uniform  on  the  property  of  the 
district  township  ;  but  the  school-house  tax  m'ty  vary  as  justice  and  equity  may 
demand.  The  tax  for  the  teachers'  fund  must  be  uniform,  except  as  provided  in 
section  29. 


80 


BLANK    FORMS. 


CO 


K 


ft?        of       a,      S 

CO          A          -      I 


jo 


ii  pu?sip  ui  s9umjoA  jo  - 


•sasnoq-jooqos  jo 


•89snOT{-[ooqos  jo 


9U112JJ 


•jidnd  qo^9  joj 
jod  uotjitu  jo 


jo 


Saiinp  {ooqos  jo  sqjuora  jo 


*s^T?p  ai  poqos  jo 


i;    fee 

cc        i 


jo 


poqos  qoi?9  ui 


8[idnd  jo 


*S[ooqos  p9pt?jS  jo 


8  jo  ' 


ouo  japim  s[ooqos  jo 


•8UO 


OAIJ    JO 


jo  *o> 


•[ooqos  jo  ioii]sip-qns  jo 


BLANK  FORMS. 


81 


*  3  P 

co     £H 

I S  i 

*  8 

M 

pa. 


d 
o 

dt^£ 

Isai 


o 
W 

1-d 


receiv 

ta 


mount 
report 
mount 
district 


£  o 


fto  ft 

+Jri    4J     d 


a  s  a-2-d  a  a-  a-^  a 


I  Hi 


OH 


d  . 
Pi 

a  t>>a 


'1 


li 

^    d 
^  ° 

11 


Bll 


82  BLANK  FORMS. 

NOTE. — The  sub-director  reports  only  the  number  of  persons  of  school  age  in 
his  sub-district ;  all  other  items  of  this  report  must  be  obtained  by  the  secretary 
from  the  district  township  records,  and  teachers'  registers.  Two  or  more  terms 
of  school  taught  in  the  same  school-house  in  the  same  year  constitute  but  one 
school.  A  graded  school  having  two  or  more  teachers  should  be  reported  as 
one  school.  When  any  item  of  this  report  requires  the  use  of  fractions,  it  should 
be  expressed  decimally.  The  number  of  months  is  found  by  dividing  the 
whole  number  of  days  by  20.  The  totals  of  the  debit  and  credit  columns 
in  the  accounts  should  always  be  equal,  and  if  not  the  cause  of  the  discrepancy 
must  be  reported.  The  report  should  be  accurately  made  and  promptly  filed 
with  the  county  superintendent ;  otherwise  the  secretary  is  to  forfeit  for  the  use 
of  the  district  the  sum  of  twenty-five  dollars,  and  to  make  good  afl  losses  resulting 
from  such  failure.  By  his  neglect  to  file  it  as  required,  the  district  may  lose  its 
distributive  share  of  school  money.  To  ascertain  the  average  compensation  paid 
male  teachers  per  week,  divide  the  aggregate  amount  paid  them  (male  teachers) 
for  teaching  during  the  year  in  the  district  township,  as  shown  by  the  books  of 
the  district  treasurer,  by  the  whole  number  of  male  teachers,  and  the  result  by 
the  average  number  of  weeks  the  schools  have  been  taught,  which  can  be 
determined  from  the  teachers'  registers.  For  instance,  six  male  teachers  have 
been  paid  tl'.e  aggregate  sum  of  one  thousand  two  hundred  dollars  for  teaching 
twenty-four  weeks,  being  an  average  of  two  hundred  dollars  each,  which  divide 
by  the  number  of  weeks,  and  we  have  eight  dollars  thirty-three  and  one-third 
cents  as  the  average  per  week.  Make  a  similar  computation  for  female  teachers. 
To  ascertain  the  average  cost  of  tuition  for  each  pupil  per  week  in  the  district 
township,  divide  the  whole  amount  paid,  by  the  whole  number  of  pupils,  and  the 
result  by  the  number  of  weeks  the  schools  have  been  taught.  For  instance, 
the  whole  number  of  pupils  attending  school  in  the  district  township  is  three 
hundred,  and  the  amount  paid  for  twenty-four  weeks  of  school  is  one  thousand 
four  hundred  and  forty  dollars.  Divide  the  amount  by  the  whole  number  of 
pupils,  and  we  have  four  dollars  and  eighty  cents  as  the  average  for  the  full  term, 
which  divide  by  the  number  of  weeks  and  we  have  twenty  cents  as  the  average 
per  week.  To  ascertain  the  average  attendance  of  scholars,  divide  the  sum  of 
the  days  they  have  been  present  by  the  number  of  days  the  schools  have  been 
taught.  For  instance,  the  teachers'  registers  show  to  have  been  present  in  the 
several  schools  of  the  district  three  hundred,  and  the  terms  to  have  been  sixty 
days.  They  have  been  present  from  fifty  to  sixty  days  each,  and  the  sum  total  of 
the  days  they  have  been  present  is  fifteen  thousand  (instead  of  eighteen  thousand, 
as  it  would  have  been  if  they  had  all  attended  regularly,)  which  divide  by  sixty, 
the  number  of  days  the  schools  have  been  taught,  and  the  result  is  two  hundred 
and  fifty  as  the  average  attendance. 


BLANK  FORMS. 


83 


NUMBER  16. 

Form  for  the  Treasurer's  account  with  the  teachers'  fund. 
[See  sections  41,  42,  and  57,  Chapter  1.] 


1872. 

DR. 

April    1 

To  cash  received  of  county  treasurer 

on  apportionment  .   . 

$  270  00 

April    1 

district  tax  

880  00 

July      1 

. 

27  00 

Sept    23 

i 

apportionment  

17  00 

Oct       1 

i 

district  tax 

19  00 

Jan.       1 

t 

district  tax  

10  00 

1872. 

CR. 

April  13 

By  cash  paid  James  Hogran,  on  order 

No  1     

$  136  00 

April  13 

Sarah  Smith, 

3  

89  00 

April  14 

Nicholas  Hoover, 

4  

135  00 

May      3 

Louisa  Martin, 

7  

82  90 

May      4 

Jas.  M.  Higgins, 

10  

115  00 

May      4 

Stephen  Phelps, 

11  

175  00 

May      5 

Amelia  Mason, 

13  

95  00 

NOTE. — A  similar  account  is  to  be  kept  with  the  school-house  fund  and  con- 
tingent fund,  and  a  statement  of  the  condition  of  either  fund  is  to  be  rendered 
at  any  time  when  required  by  the  board.  By  keeping  a  correct  account  of  the 
orders,  as  per  Form  No.  12,  the  treasurer  will  know  the  amount  outstanding,  and 
can  readily  determine  what  per  cent  on  each  he  can  pay  with  the  funds  on  hand 

The  above  form  is  intended  for  separate  pages  opposite  each  other. 


NUMBER  17. 

Form  for  list  of  heads  of  families  and  children,  to  be  kept  ~by  sub-director. 
[See  section  48,  Chapter  1.] 


PARENTS    OR  GUARDIANS. 

NAMES   OF   CHILDREN. 

SEX. 

AGE. 

John  Smith. 
James  Jones. 
Anna  Byron. 

Peter  Smith. 
Eliza  Smith. 
William  Jones. 
Charles  Peters,  (ward.) 
James  Byron. 

Male. 
Female. 
Male. 
Male. 

Male. 

12  years. 
10    " 
15    " 
13    " 
10    " 

NOTE. — The  above  list  should  be  recorded  in  a  book,  and  carefully  preserved 
with  the  records  of  the  sub-district,  and  from  which  the  sub-director  can  mak  e 
his  annual  report  to  the  district  secretary  as  required  by  section  49,  of  chapter  1. 


84  BLANK  FORMS. 


NUMBER  18. 

Form  of  contract  for  building  a  school-house. 
[See  section  47,  Chaper  1.] 

Contract  made  and  entered  into  between  A B ,  of  the  county 

of ,  and  state  of  Iowa,  and  C D ,  as  sub-director 

of  sub-district  number ,  of  district  township  of in  the  county 

of and  state  of  Iowa,  and  his  sucessors  in  office. 

In  consideration  of  the  sum  of  one  dollar  in  hand  paid,  the  receipt  whereof  is 
hereby  acknowledged,  and  of  the  further  sum  of  five  hundred  dollars,  to  be  paid 

as  hereinafter  specified,  the  said  A B ,  hereby  agrees  to  build  a 

brick  school-house  and  to  furnish  the  material  therefor,  according  to  the  plan 
and  specifications  for  the  erection  of  said  house  hereto  appended,  at  such  point  in 
said  sub-district  as  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district  township  may  designate. 
The  said  house  is  to  be  built  of  the  best  material,  in  a  substantial,  workmanlike 

manner ;    and  is  to  be  completed  and  delivered  to  the  said  C  D ., 

or  his  successors  in  office,  free  from  any  lien  for  work  done  or  material  furnished, 

by  the day  of ,  18. .  ;  and  in  case  the  said  house  is  not 

finished  by  the  time  herein  specified,  the-said  A B shall  forfeit 

and(pay  to  the  said  C D ,  or  his  successor  in  office,  for  the  use  of 

said  district  township,  the  sum  of  one  hundred  dollars,  and  shall  also  be  liable  for 
all  damages  that  may  result  to  said  district  township  in  consequence  of  such 
failure. 

The  said  C D ,  or  his  successor  in  office,  in  behalf  of  said  dis- 
trict township,  hereby  agrees  to  pay  the  said  A B the  sum  of 

fifty  dollars  when  the  foundation  of  said  house  is  finished ;  and  the  further  sum 
of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  when  the  walls  are  up  and  ready  for  the  roof; 
and  the  remaining  sum  of  two  hundred  dollars  when  the  said  house  is  finished 
and  delivered  as  herein  stipulated. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  this  contract  shall  not  be  sub-let,  transferred,  or  as- 
signed without  the  consent  of  both  parties. 

Witness  our  hands  this day  of ,  18. . 

A B , 

Contractor. 

C D ..., 

Sub-director. 

This  is  to  certify  that  the  foregoing  contract  was  approved  by  the  board  of 

directors  of  district  township  of    ,  in  the  county  of ,  of 

the  state  of  Iowa,  this day  of ,  18.. 

E F , 

President. 

& H , 

Secretary. 


BLANK  FORMS.  85 

NOTE. — The  law  authorizes  a  sub-director  to  make  contracts  under  such  rules 
and  restrictions  as  the  township  board  may  prescribe.  Hence,  in  aU  cases  where 
it  becomes  his  duty  to  make  a  contract,  it  is  proper,  in  order  to  avoid  all  subse- 
quenc  dispute,  that  the  approval  of  the  board  of  directors  should  be  indorsed  on 
the  contract  before  any  work  is  done  under  it.  In  building  a  permanent  school- 
house,  it  is  all  important  to  secure  a  plan  of  the  building,  with  full  specifications 
as  to  its  dimensions,  style  of  architecture,  number  and  size  of  windows  and  doors, 
quality  of  materials  to  be  used,  what  kind  of  roof,  number  of  coats  of  paint,  of 
what  material  the  foundation  shall  be  constructed,  its  depth  below  and  its  height 
above  the  surface  of  the  ground,  the  number  and  style  of  chimneys  and  flues,  the 
provisions  for  ventilation,  the  number  of  coats  of  plastering  and  style  of  finish, 
and  all  other  items  in  detail  that  may  be  deemed  necessary.  The  plan  and 
specifications  should  be  attached  to  the  contract,  and  the  whole  filed  with  the 
secretary  of  the  district  township. 


NUMBER  19. 

Form  of  Bond  for  performance  of  contract. 

Know  all  men  by  these  presents :  That  we,  A B as  principal 

L M ,J H  . ,  and  R 8 ,  as  securi- 
ties of  the  county  of and  state  of  Iowa,  are  held  and  firmly  bound 

unto  district  township  of ,  in  the  county  of ,  and  state 

of  Iowa,  in  the  penal  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  for  the  payment  of  which, 
well  and  truly  to  be  made,  we  bind  ourselves,  our  heirs,  administrators  and 
assigns,  jointly,  severally  and  firmly,  by  these  presents. 

The  condition  of  the  above  obligation  is  such  that,  whereas  the  said  A 

B has  this  day  entered  into  a  written  contract  with  C D 

as  sub-director  of  sub-district  number. ...  of  district  township  of , 

in  the  county  of ,  and  state  of  Iowa,  and  his  successors  in  office,  for 

the  erection  and  completion  of  a  school-house  in  said  sub-dsitrict,  by  the 

day  of ,  18. . .  ,  according  to  the  plan  and  specification  for  the  con- 
struction of  said  house  appended  to  said  contract. 

Now,  therefore,  if  the  said  A B shall  faithfully  and  fully  com- 
ply with  all  the  stipulations  of  said  contract,  then  this  obligation  shall  be  void  ; 
otherwise  remain  in  full  force  and  virtue  in  law. 

In  testimony  whereof  we  have  hereunto  subscribed  our  names  this 

day  of ,  18.... 

A B 

Principal. 

L M , 

J H , 

B 8 , 

Securities. 


86  BLANK  FORMS. 

NUMBER  20. 

Form  of  contract  between  sub-director  and  teacher. 
(See  sections  47  and  51,  Chapter  1.) 

This  contract,  between  A B ,  a  school  teacher  of 

county,  Iowa,  and  C D ,a  sub-director  of  sub-district  No. . . 

of  the  district  township  of ,  in  the  county  of and  state  of 

Iowa,  witnesseth : 

That  the  said  A B agrees  to  teach  the  public  school  in  said 

sub-district  for  the  term  of. weeks,  commencing  on  the day  of 

,18  . . .,  and  well  and  faithfully  to  perform  the  duties  of  teacher  in 

said  school,  according  to  law,  and  the  rules  legally  established  for  the  govern- 
ment thereof. 

In  consideration  of  said  services,  the  said  C D ,  as  sub-director 

aforesaid,  on  behalf  of  said  district  township,  agrees  to  pay  the  said  A 

B the  sum  of dollars  per  school  month,  at  the  end  of 

,  and  to  perform  all  the  duties  required  by  law  as  such  sub- 
director. 

Witness  our  hands  this day  of ,  A.  D.  18. . . 

A B ,  Teacher. 

C D ,  Sub-director. 


It  is  hereby  certified  that  the  within  contract  is  approved  this  

day  of 18 

E F 

President. 

NOTE. — With  a  little  variation  the  above  form  will  also  answer  for  indepen- 
dent districts.  Let  the  contract  be  duly  executed  and  filed  with  the  president 
before  the  teacher  enters  upon  his  duties.  Give  the  teacher  a  certified  copy  of 
the  contract  if  he  desires  it. 


NUMBER  21. 

Form   of   Lease. 

[See  section  47,  Chapter  1.] 

Know  all  men  by  these  presents  :    That  A B ,  of  the  county  of 

and  state  of  Iowa,  for  the  consideration  hereinafter  mentioned, 

does   hereby  lease  unto  C D ,  sub-director  of  sub-district  No. 

,  of  district  township  of ,  in  the  county  of ,  and  state  of 

Iowa,  or  his  successors  in  office,  for  the  use  of  said  district  township  for  school 


BLANK  FORMS.  87 

purposes,  the  following  described  premises,  situate  in  the  county  and  state  afore- 
said, to-wit:  (here  describe  the  house  and  lot  or  parcel  of  ground)  together  with 

all  the  privileges  thereto  belonging,  for  the  term  of months  from  the 

day  of ,18.... 

The  said  C D  ,  sub-director  as  aforesaid,  or  his  successors  in 

office,  hereby  agrees  to  pay  the  said  A B for  the  use  of  said 

premises  the  monthly  rate  of dollars  to  be  paid  at  the  expiration  of  this 


In  testimony  wliereof,  we  have  hereunto  subscribed  our  names  this day 

of ,18.... 

Signed  in  duplicate.  A B , 

C D , 

Sub-director  of  sub-district  No 

NOTE.— Asa  matter  of  safety,  the  abive  lease  should  be  executed  in  duplicate, 
one  to  be  held  by  the  sub-director  and  the  other  by  the  lessor.  The  lease 
should  be  approved  by  the  board  of  directors,  as  in  case  of  a  contract,  and  the 
duplicate  filed  with  the  president. 


NUMBER  22. 

Form  of  Deed. 

(See  section  47,  Chapter  1.) 

Know  all  men  by  these  presents  :  That  we,  J L.  S and  M E. 

S ,  his  wife,  of  the  county  of ,  and  state  of  Iowa,  in  consider- 
ation of  the  sum  of dollars  in  hand  paid,  do  hereby  sell  and 

convey  unto  district  township  of ,  in  the  county  of 

and  state  of  Iowa,  the  following  described  premises  situated  in  the  county  and 
state  aforesaid,  to-wit :  (here  describe  the  premises.) 

And  we  do  hereby  covenant  with  the  said  district  township  that  we  are  law- 
ully  seized  of  said  premises;  that  they  are  free  from  encumbrance;  that  we  have 
good  right  and  lawful  authority  to  sell  the  same ;  and  we  do  hereby  covenant  to 
warrant  and  defend  the  title  to  the  said  premises  against  the  lawful  claims  of  all 
persons  whomsoever. 

Signed  this day  of 18.... 

In  presence  of  J L.  S , 

M..  .  E.  S.. 


BIANK  FORMS- 


STATE  OF  IOWA, 

.,  COUNTY. 


On  this day  of ,  A.  D,  18 ,  before  me,  a 

notary  public  in  and  for  said  county  personally  came  .     and 

his  wife,  personally  to  me  known  to  be  the  identical 

persons  whose  names  are  affixed  to  the  above  deed  as  grantors,  and  acknowl- 
edged the  same  to  be  their  voluntary  act  and  deed,  for  the  purposes  therein 
expressed. 

Witness  my  hand  and  notarial  seal  this  .....   day 

of  . .  .  18. . 


B , 

Notary  Public. 


NOTE — In  purchasing  the  grounds  for  school-house  purposes,  the  sub-director 
should  examine  the  title  carefully,  and  be  satisfied  that  it  is  not  defective,  and 
that  the  property  is  free  from  encumbrance.  Under  the  laws  of  our  state,  the 
joining  of  the  wife  with  the  husband  in  the  conveyance  passes  the  right  of  dower, 
and  hence  no  future  relinquishment  of  dower  is  necessary.  Let  the  property  in 
all  cases  be  conveyed  to  the  district  in  its  corporate  name.  The  deed  should  be 
filed  with  the  president 


NUMBER    23.    (a) 

Form  for  Notice  from  the  clerk  of  board  of  supervisors  to  the  president  of  the  dis 

trict. 

OFFICE  OP  CLERK  OF  BOARD  OF  SUPERVISORS,    \ 

COUNTY,  IOWA,       >- 

18...     1 

To  C D , 

President  of  district  township  of. 


SIR  : — You  are  hereby  notified  that  according  to  the  apportionment  of  the 

school  money  made  by  the  undersigned  this  day,  the  sum  of, dollars  is 

due  district  township  of .,in  the  county   of, and  state  of  Iowa, 

from  this  office,  for  which  I  hand  you  herewith  my  warrant  on  the  county  treas- 
urer. 

A B , 

Clerk  of  Board  of  Supervisors. 


BLANK  FORMS.  89 

NUMBER  23  (b). 

Form  for  Notice  from  the  county  treasurer  to  the  president  of  the  district. 
[See  Section  60,  Chapter  1.] 


OFFICE  OF  COUNTY  TREASURER, 
COUNTY,  IOWA 

..18 


r-i 


To  C D , 

President  of  district  township  of 

SIR  : — You  are  hereby  notified  that  the  amount  now  collected  and  due  the  dis- 
trict township  of, .of ,  county  is  $ .teachers'  fund,  $ 

. . . .,  school-house  fund,  and  $ ,  contingent  fund. 

A B , 

County  Treasurer^ 

NOTE. — It  is  the  duty  of  the  county  treasurer  to  notify  the  president  of  the 
school  board  of  each  district,  quarterly,  of  the  amount  collected  for  each  school 
fund  and  pay  it  to  the  treasurers  of  the  respective  school-boards  on  the  warrant 
of  the  president,  countersigned  by  the  secretary,  Sec.  59. 

On  the  first  Monday  in  April  of  each  year  the  county  treasurer  also  renders  a 
statement  of  the  amount  of  taxes  uncollected  in  each  district  township,  Sec.  60. 


si  2 


90 


BLANK  FORMS. 


Is 

t3  "^ 

*?H      <U 

*   § 


5^       ^GO 
S  S" 


g    | 

d    I 


•a 


•s£ep 


*S 


•jSqdi3.iSoqi.io 


rang 


rang 


rang 


•61  ' 


•8T  ' 


•8SV 


•ON 


4- 


CO 


+   I     I 


9  A 


4- 


\ 


i 


X 


•f 


*  I     * 


#       * 


4- 


4- 


4- 


S  IS  !°°  IS 


pp 


o 


PH 


w 


CO 


01 


± 

+ 


CO 


H-  I  + 


+     + 


+ 


4- 


4- 


o 


BLANK  FORMS.  91 

NOTE. — This  register  should  be  kept  in  a  book,  permanently  bound,  and 
belonging  to  the  district.  One  should  be  supplied  by  the  directors  for  use  in 
each  sub-district.  The  above  form  includes  all  the  items  of  which  the  law 
requires  the  teacher  to  keep  a  record ;  and,  with  the  exception  of  tardiness,  only 
these.  Attendance  in  the  forenoon  is  indicated  by  an  oblique  line  drawn  from 
the  right  down  toward  the  left ;  in  the  afternoon,  by  a  line  inclining  toward  the 

right.    For  instance,  on  Wednesday,  the  27th  of  May,  A B 

attended  only  in  the  forenoon,  and  C D only  in  the  afternoon. 

Tardiness  may  be  indicated  by  a  line  only  one-half  the  ordinary  length.      For 

instance,  A B was  tardy  in  the  forenoon  of  May  20th,  ana  on 

the  following  day  was  tardy  both  forenoon  and  afternoon.  The  letter  "e"  placed 
over  the  tardy  or  absence  mark  denotes  "  excused."  The  number  of  minutes 

tardy  may  be  placed  in  the  same  space,  if  desired  ;    thus,  A B was 

tardy  seven  minutes  on  the  morning  of  Monday,  June  1st.  The  branches  pursued 
by  each  pupil  are  denoted  by  stars  placed  in  the  appropriate  columns,  at  the 
right.  The  above  form  includes  only  a  term  of  three  weeks ;  but  the  number  of 
columns  may  be  extended  to  correspond  with  the  number  of  weeks  in  the  term. 


92 


BLANK  FORMS. 


I 

o 
2 

d 
o 

Q 

S 


CO 


he  county 
nd  ending 


wnship  o 
ay  of 


n  sub-district  numbe 
owa,  for  the  term  commencing  on 


taugh 
tate  o 


d> 

il 

^0 

g 

^> 

CO 

1 

^ 

0 

^ 

05 

% 

<"£ 
O 

*»• 

3           03 

•>           f-l 

s    2 

O 

3 

2 

R 

f., 

«5 

V 

J 
*J 

Tc 

1 

2 
''B 

O) 

<M 
"2 

Q 

fr 

'O 

w 

X 

d 
S 

«M 

0 

| 

.5 

3 

^2 

0 

•g 

1 

0> 

£ 

& 

3 
« 

2 

0 

P 
g. 

tendance 

g 

c 

OJ 

S 

'o 

0 

I 

,q 
** 

% 

Is.. 

r3 
o 
d 
_t/] 

C3 

A 

S3 

5 

s 

«tH 

c 

'E 

'S 

cT 
o 

cc 
03 

OQ 

1 

tu 

'M 

o 
^ 

.2 

1 
g 

'i 

0 

r^ 

s 

•w 

a 

1 

cV-i 

j         Q} 
O 

r=! 
-t-3 

V 

& 

^ 

p. 

0 

^ 
d 

der  the 

0 

i 

^>> 

*3 

C 
j-i 

J 

3 

^3 

J3 

d 

O 

G 

^ 

^ 

'£ 

03 

O 

s 

J3 

£i 

i> 

~jj 

»O 

o 

s 

fl 
d 

^ 
a 

n 

'5: 

s 

J2 

3 

S 

c 
> 

J 

£ 

3 

rt 

^P 

BLANK  FORMS.  93 

NUMBER  26. 

Form  of  Teacher's  Certificate. 
[See  sections  61,  64  and  65,  Chapter  1.] 

OFFICE  OF  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  OF  COMMON  SCHOOLS,  ) 
COUNTY  OF ,  AND  STATE  OF  IOWA.        f 

I, ,  county  superintendent  of  common  schools,  in  and  for  the  county 

of and  state  of  Iowa,  hereby  certify  that  I  have  this  day  examined  the 

bearer, ,  in  orthography,  reading,  writing,  arithmetic,  geography, 

history  of  the  United  States,  and  English  grammar,  and  that  I  find 

qualified  in  the  same  ;  and  being  fully  satisfied  that possesses  a  good 

moral  character,  aptness  to  teach,  and  ability  to  govern,  I  hereby  grant  unto 

this class  certificate,  by  which is  authorized  to  teach 

in  any  of  the  public  schools  of  this  county  for  the  period  of  from  the 

date  hereof,  unless  this  certificate  is  sooner  revoked. 

In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  subscribed  my  name  at ,  this 

day  of ,  A.  D.  18.. 


County  Superintendent  of  Common  Schools. 

NOTE. — It  is  essential  in  the  examination  of  a  teacher,  that4ie  should  possess, 
first,  a  good  moral  character — second,  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  branches 
named  in  the  law — and  third,  the  ability  to  govern  a  school  and  the  faculty  of 
imparting  knowledge.  Without  these  qualifications,  an  applicant  is  not  entitled 
to  a  certificate.  A  certificate  is  not  valid  out  of  the  county  in  which  it  is  given. 


NUMBER  27. 

Form  for  Revocation  of  teacher's  certificate. 
[See  section  69,  Chapter  1.] 

OFFICE  OF  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  OF  COMMON  SCHOOLS,  ) 
COUNTY  OF ,  AND  STATE  OF  IOWA.        J 

To  the  several  boards  of  school  directors  in  the  county  of ,  and 

state  of  Iowa : 

WHEREAS,  the  undersigned  did  on  the day  of ,  18. . 

execute  and  deliver  to  A B ,  a  certificate,  authorizing  him  to 

teach  in  public  schools  of  this  county  ;  and, 

WHEREAS,  upon  due  examination  it  has  been  made  to  appear  that  the  said 

A B ,  in  consequence  of  (here  state  the  offense— gross  immorality 

for  example),  is  unworthy  longer  to  retain  the  same  : 


94  BLANK  FORMS. 

Now,  therefore,  in  pursuance  of  the  provisions  of  section  69,  chapter  1  of  the 
school-laws  of  the  state  of  Iowa,  the  said  certificate  is  hereby  revoked. 

In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  subscribed  my  name  this day  of 

A.  D.,  18.. 

0 D , 

County  Superintendent. 

NOTE. — A  copy  of  the  above  revocation  should  be  transmitted  to  the  secretary 
of  each  school-district,  and  the  secretary  should  immediately  notify  each  sub- 
director  in  his  district  of  the  fact.  The  teacher  should  also  be  served  with  a  copy. 


NUMBER  28. 

Form  of  Oath  of  school  officer. 
[See  section  561' Rev.  I860.] 

STATE  OF  IOWA,     ) 
County,  f  ss 

J,  A B ,  do  solemnly  swear  [or  affirm]  that  I  will  support  the 

constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  the  constitution  of  the  state  of  Iowa,  and 
that    I  will    faithfully    and    impartially    discharge    the    duties    of   [secretary 

or  treasurer,  as  the  case  may  be,]  of  district  township  of in  the  county 

of and  state  of  Iowa,  according  to  law  and  to  the  best  of  my  abilities. 

A B 

Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  this day  of A.  D.,  18. . 

C D , 

Justice  of  the  Peace. 


NUMBER  29. 

Form  for  Certificate  of  Appointment  of  school  district  officers. 
[See   section  18,  Chapter  1.] 

'..,  18. 


To  A B : 

You  are  hereby  notified,  that  at  a  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  district 

township  ot ,  in  the  county  of ,  and  state  of  Iowa,  held 

on  the day  of ,  18. .,  you  were  duly  appointed  (here  name  the 

officer)  in  and  for  said  district  township,  to  fill  the  vacancy  occasioned  by  the 

(here  state  the  cause  of  the  vacancy)  of  L M 

C D , 

Secretary  of  district  township  of  


BLANK  FORMS,  95 

NOTE.  —  For  the  appointment  of  sub-director,  insert  in  the  above  form  the 

words  "  sub-district  number of"  immediately  after  the  word  "  for." 

The  oath  of  office  of  the  persoii  appointed  must  be  endorsed  upon  the  foregoing 
certificate,  in  case  he  is  required  to  give  bond. 


NUMBER  30. 

Form  of  Application  for  a  teachers'  institute. 
[See  section  137,  Chapter  1.] 

OFFICE  OF  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  OF  COMMON  SCHOOLS, 
,  COUNTY,  18... 

To  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction: 

From  satisfactory  evidence  on  file  in  this  office,  I  hereby  certify  that  not  less 

than  twenty  teachers  desire  to  assemble  at in  the  county  aforesaid, 

011  the day  of 18. . . .  for  the  purpose  of  holding  a  teachers' 

institute,  to  remain  in  session  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  six  working  days. 

In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  subscribed  my  name  the  day  and  year 
first  above  written. 

G H 

County  Superintendent  of  Common  Schools, 


NOTE. — I  would  suggest  that  the  proper  mode  of  procedure  would  be  for  the 
teachers  to  circulate  a  petition,  and  after  they  have  procured  the  requisite  number 
of  signatures,  let  it  be  filed  with  the  county  superintendent,  as  the  basis  of  his 
application  to  this  office.  I  do  not  conceive  it  to  be  necessary  that  all  who  sign 
the  petition  should  be  residents  of  the  county— that  they  purpose  attending  the 
institute,  if  in  their  power  so  to  do,  is  sufficient,  without  any  regard  to  residence, 
so  it  is  within  the  state.  The  institute,  however,  is  designed  especially  for  the 
benefit  of  the  teachers  of  the  county  in  which  it  is  held.  The  law  appropriates 
the  sum  of  fifty  dollars  annually  to  each  county  which  can,  in  good  faith,  secure 
the  requisite  number  of  teacheis. 


96  BLANK  FORMS. 

NUMBER  31. 

The  Law  of  Appeal. 
[See  section  124,  Chapter  1.] 

AFFIDAVIT. 


THE  STATE  OF  IOWA,  ) 
COUNTY  OF j" 

A B ) 

vs.  V 

DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF ) 

I,  A B being  duly  sworn,  on  oath  say  :  that  on  the 

day  of A.  D.  18. ...  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district  township 

rendered  a  decision  [or  made  an  order  as  the  case  may  be]  whereby  |  here  state 
the  facts  showing  affiant's  interest  in  the  decision,  and  the  injury  to  that  interest]  ; 
that  said  board  in  rendering  the  decision  [or  making  the  order]  aforesaid,  com- 
mitted errors  as  follows :  [Here  state  the  errors  charged.] 

[Signed]  A B 

Subscribed  and  sworn  to,  by  A B before  me,  this 

day  of A.  D.  18 

C D J.  P.  [or  other  officer.] 


NUMBER  32. 

Notice  of  Appeal. 
(See  section  126,  Chapter  1.) 


THE  STATE  OF  IOWA, 
COUNTY  OF 


DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 

ToC D , 

Secretary  of  board  of  directors  of  said  district  township : 

You  are  hereby  notified  that  said  A B has  filed  in  my  office 

an  affidavit  alleging  that  said  board  of  directors,  on  the day  of 

A.  D.  18. ...,  made  a  decision  [or  order  as  the  case  may  be]  whereby  [here 
describe  the  decision  or  order  so  that  the  secretary  may  identify  it,]  and  claiming 
an  appeal  therefrom.  You  are  therefore  required  within  ten  days  after  receiving 
this  notice,  to  file  in  my  office  at ,  in  said  county,  a  complete  trans- 
cript of  the  record  and  proceedings  of  the  board  relating  to  said  order. 

E F , 

County  Superintendent. 


BLANK  FORMS. 

NUMBER  33. 

Transcript  from  district  secretary. 
[See  section  126,  Chapter  1.] 


THE  STATE  OF  IOWA, 
COUNTY  OF  


A B... 

vs. 
DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 


Papers  filed  with  the  secretary  of  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district 
township. 

Be  it  remembered  that  on  the day ,  A.  D.  18 ,  a 

petition  was  filed  in  words  and  figures  following,  to-wit :  [here  copy  petition 
in  full 

And  afterward,  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.  18 ,  a  remon- 
strance was  filed,  in  words  and  figures  following,  to-wit :  [here  copy  remonstrance 
in  full.] 

And  afterward,  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.  18 . . . . ,  a  plat  was 

filed  by  Q- H ,  in  behalf  of  said  petitioners,  [or  remonstrants]  in 

words  and  figures  following,  to-wit:  [here  copy  the  plat  in  full.  If  any  other 
paper  is  filed,  let  it  be  introduced  and  copied  in  like  manner.  If  the  secretary  is 
at  a  loss  how  to  characterize  it,  let  him  say  "  a  paper  in  words  and  figures  fol- 
lowing :"] 

And  afterward,  on  the  day  of ,  A.  D.,  18 a  decision  was  ren- 
dered [or  order  made]  by  said  board,  as  appears  of  record  on  the  minutes  of  said 
board,  in  words  and  figures  following,  to-wit :  [here  copy  the  order  as  it  appears 
in  the  minutes.]  If  action  was  had  by  the  board  at  different  times  in  regard  to 
the  matter,  let  the  several  entries  on  the  minutes  be  introduced  and  copied. 

CERTIFICATE. 

I,  C D ... ., secretary  of  the  board  of  directors  of  district  township 

of ,  in  the  county  of Iowa,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  is 

a  correct  and  complete  transcript  of  the  record  and  proceedings  of  said  board 
relating  to  the  order  described  in  the  notice  of  appeal  hereto  annexed. 

C D , 

District  Secretary. 


813 


98  BLANK  FORMS. 

NUMBER  34. 

[See  section  127,  Chapter  1.] 

Notiee  of  Hearing. 

THE  STATE  OF  IOWA,    } 
COUNTY  OP f 


A B 

vs. 
DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP   OF 


To  A B ,  Appellant,  C "D ,secretaryof  board  of 

directors  of  said  district  township,  and  to  G H and  I J 

,  parties  adversely  interested. 

You  are  hereby  notified  that  an  appeal  has  been  taken  from  a  certain  decision 
[or  order]  of  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district  township,[here  describe  the 
decision  or  order,]  and  that  said  matter  of  appeal  will  be  heard  before  me  at 
,  in  said  county,  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.,  18 ,at.... 

o'clock . . . .  M. 

E F 

County  Superintendent. 


NUMBER  35. 

Form  of  County  Superintendent's  Minutes. 

THE  STATE  OF  IOWA,  } 
COUNTY  OF ) 


A B ,) 

vs.  > 

DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF ) 


January  2, 1872.  Affidavit  of  said  appellant  filed.  Mailed  notice  of  appeal  to 

C D ,  secretary  of  board  of  directors  of  said  district  township 

at ,  in  said  county.  (Or,  served  notice  of  appeal  personally  on 

C D ,  &c.,  as  the  case  may  be.) 

January  9,  1872.  Received  and  filed  transcript  from  secretary  of  said  board. 

Appointed  that  the  hearing  should  take  place  at  my  office  in ,  in 

said  county  on  the  20th  day  of  January,  1872,  at  10  o'clock  A.  M.  Mailed  notice 

of  same  to  A B ,  appellant,  at  [give  post-office  address,]  to 

(here  give  names  and  address  of  those  entitled  to  notice,)  as  persons  adversely 
interested,  and  to  said  C D 

January  20,  1872.  The  case  being  called  up,  A B ,  appellant, 

appeared,  and  K L ,  of  [give  address,]  in  opposition  to  the 


BLANK  FORMS.  99 

appeal.  Appellant  offered  in  evidence  a  plat  wbich  was  filed.  He  then  pro- 
duced M N ,  as  a  witness  in  behalf  of  the  appeal,  whose  testi- 
mony was  taken  and  reduced  to  writing.  In  opposition  to  the  appeal j  there  was 

offered  in  evidence  a  contract  which  was  filed,  and  O P ,  and 

Q R ,  were  produced  as  witnesses,  whose  testimony  was  taken 

and  reduced  to  writing.  Thereupon  the  parties  submitted  the  case.  Case  taken 
under  advisement  till  to-morrow  morning  at  9  o'clock. 

January  23,  1872.     [Here  recite  the  decision  made.      The  superintendent  may 
also,  if  he  chooses,  give  his  reasons  for  the  decision  at  length.] 


NUMBER  36. 

Form  of  Superintendent's  Transcript. 


THE  STATE  OF  IOWA, ) 

COUNTY  OF f 

A :..  B 

99. 

DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  of 


Papers  filed  with  E F ,  county  superintendent. 

Be  it  remembered  that  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.  18. . .,  an  f.ffidavit  of 

A B ,  of  [give  post-office  address,]  was  filed  in  words  and  figures 

following,  to-wit :    |  here  copy  affidavit  in  full.] 

And  afterward  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.  18. .,  a  transcript  from 

C D ,  of  [give  post-office  address,]  secretary  of  board  of  direc. 

tors  of  said  district,  was  filed  in  words  and  figures  following,  to-wit :  [Here  copy 
transcript  in  full.] 

And  afterward  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.  18 ,  at  the  hearing  of  said 

case,  A B appeared  in  favor  of  said  appeal,  and  8 

T....  .,of  [give  post-office  address,]  and  U V ,  of ,  in 

opposition  thereto.    And  in  favor  of  said  appeal  was  offered  in  evidence  a  plat 

in  words  and  figures  following  to-wit :  [here  copy  plat  in  full,]  and  also  M 

N was  produced  as  a  witness,  who  testified  as  follows,  to-wit :  [here  copy 

his  testimony.] 

And  in  opposition  to  said  appeal,  there  was  offered  in  evidence  a  contract  in 
words  and  figures  following,  to-wit :  [here  copy  the  contract,]  and  there  was 

produced  O P ,  who  testified  as  follows:  [here  copy  this  witness' 

testimony.]    And  there  was  also  produced  Q R ,  who  testified  as 

follows;  [copy  his  testimony.] 

The  above  being  all  the  testimony  offered,  the  parties  submitted  the  case.  And 
thereupon  the  following  decision  was  pronounced  :  [here  copy  the  decision.]  To 
the  whole  should  be  appended  a  certificate  by  the  superintendent,  which  may  be 
in  form  like  that  of  the  district  secretary  to  his  transcript.  See  Form  No.  33. 


INDEX. 


Sec.    Page. 
AMENDMENTS— Tabular  exhibit  of vi. 

CHAPTER  I. 

APPEAL- 
TO  county  superintendent  from  order  of  board  of  directors,  who 

may 123  51 

Time  within  which  appeal  may  be  taken 123  51 

The  basis  of  proceeding  to  be  an  affidavit 124  52 

Affidavit  must  be  filed  within  thirty  days 124  52 

Errors  must  be  set  forth  in  a  concise  manner. ... 125  52 

County  superintendent  to  notify  secretary  of  appeal 126  52 

Secretary  to  make  trnnscript 126  52 

County  superintendent  to  notify  adverse  parties  of  time  and 

place  for  (hearin'g 127  53 

Trial  of,  before  county  superintendent 128  54 

From  county  superintendent  to  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion, how  taken 129  56 

Superintendent  of  public  instruction  to  notify  county  superin- 
tendent of 129  56 

Notice  to  adverse  party 129  56 

Decision  of  superintendent  of  public  instruction  final 129  56 

Necessary  postage  paid  by  aggrieved  party 130  58 

APPORTIONMENT— 

Of  amount  determined  by  electors  of  sub-district 12  6 

Of  tax  voted  by  township  meeting 28  15 

Of  county  school  tax  and  other  funds  by  clerk  of  board  of  super- 
visors   , 57  27 

ARBITRATORS— 

To  decide  when  district  boards  fail  to  agree  upon  division  of 

assets,  etc « 4  1 

BIBLE— Not  to  be  excluded  from  the  schools 82>  38 

BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS— 

To  continue  to  act  when  district  township  is  divided 4  1 

Divide  assets  and  liabilities 4  1 

How  constituted  where  there  is  but  one  sub-district. .  10  5 


102  INDEX 

BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS— CONTINUED— 

Same,  where  there  are  two  sub-districts ...     10  5 

Apportion  tax  among  sub-districts j  ^ 

How  constituted 13  7 

Enter  upon  their  duties,  when 13  7 

Organization  of 13  7 

Fegular  meetings 14  g 

Special  meetings 14  8 

Make  contracts,  purchases,  etc 15  8 

Consult  county  superintendent  before  erecting  school-houses  ...     15  8 

Fix  site  for  school-house 16  9 

Determine  number  and  duration  of  schools 16  9 

Establish  graded  or  union  schools 17  10 

May  appoint  superintendent  of  graded  schools 17  10 

May  fill  vacancies  in  board 18  10 

Require  secretary  and  treasurer  to  give  bond 19  10 

Examine  accounts  of  treasurer ..20  11 

Make  statement  to  district  township  meeting 20  11 

Audit  claims  against  the  district 21  11 

Fix  compensation  of  secretary  and  treasurer 21  11 

Visit  schools  in  the  district 22  12 

Aid  teachers  in  enforcing  rules 22  12 

May  expel  teachers  from  school 22  12 

Require  secretary  to  file  certificate  of  qualification  of  officers  of 

the  board  with  clerk  of  board  of  supervisors,  etc 23  13 

Divide  township  into  sub-districts 24  13 

Change  sub-district  boundaries 24  13 

Cause  written  description  to  be  recorded 24  13 

May  consent  to  attach  territory  to  adjoining  township 25  14 

May  restore  territory 26  15 

Set  off  territory  in  certain  cases 27  15 

Estimate  additional  school-house  tax 29  15 

Estimate  amount  for  contingent  fund,  and  teachers'  fund 29  16 

Estimate  additional  tax  for  schools 29  16 

Require  secretary  to  certify  tax  to  board  of  supervisors j  ^9 

Make  rules  to  govern  sub-directors 30  17 

A  majority  a  quorum 31  17 

Certify  no  tax  after  third  Monday  in  May 31  17 

Majority  of  board  required  to  change  boundaries 31  17 

Receive  no  pay  for  services 31  17 

May  employ  counsel  in  suits 33  18 

Shall  designate  school-house  tax  for  each  sub-district 54  25 

May  receive  pupils  from  adjoining  districts 77  36 


TO  SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  1Q3 

Sec.  Tage. 
BOARD  ,OF  DIRECTORS— CONTINUED— 

May  subscribe  for  School  Journal 84  39 

Not  to  change  text-books  oftener  than  once  in  three  years 86  39 

Satisfy  judgment  by  order • .     91  41 

Of  district  townships,  >«ave  no  jurisdiction  in  independent  dis- 
tricts      95  42 

Require  the  secretaries  to  give  notice 106  47 

Present  statement  of  receipts  and  expenditures 107  47 

Call  election 110  47 

Call  meetings  in  each  sub-district Ill  48 

May  change  name  of  district,  when 112  48 

Make  division  of  assets  and  liabilities 114  48 

May  levy  tax  to  pay  interest  on  bonds  when  electors  fail  to  do  so  117  49 

Provide  for  payment  of  bonds  at  maturity 117  49 

Appeals  from,  by  whom  taken 123  51 

BOARD  OF  SUPER  VISORS- 

To  levy  school-house  tax  12  6 

To  reduce  school-house  tax,  when 12  6 

To  lexy  tax  on  sub-districts,when  28  15 

Levy  additional  tax  for  schools,  when 29  16 

Levy  tax  certified  by  secretary 38  19 

To  levy  county  school  tax 52  25 

To  levy  district  school  tax 53  25 

Determine  per  centum 54  25 

Not  to  exceed  maximum  limit 54  25 

Reduce  amount  certified,  when 55  26 

Not  to  divide  sub-districts 56  26 

May  allow  additional  compensation  to  county  superintendent. . .     75  33 

To  levy  tax  to  pay  money  borrowed  of  school  fund 92  41 

BONDS— 

Secretary  and  treasurer  to  give 19  10 

With  whom  filed  , 19  10 

Independent  districts  may  issue,  for  erection  of  school-houses. . .   115  48 

Rate  of  interest  on 115  48 

Electors  to  vote  upon  question  of  issue 116  49 

Denomination  and  time.  y 116  49 

Treasurer  to  negotiate 116  49 

To  be  negotiated  at  par. 116  49 

CLERK  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  SUPERVISORS— 

Record  plats  of  district  townships 24  13 

To  apportion  county  school  tax,  and  other  funds  among  districts.    57  27 
Forward  certificate  of  election,  and  qualification  of  county  super- 
intendent to  superintendent  of  public  instruction 58  27 


J  04  INDEX 

Sec  Pa^e 
CLERK  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  SUPERVISORS— CONTINUED— 

Report  interest  of  school  fund  in  hands  of  county  treasurer  to 

auditor  of  state 58  27 

To  deduct  average  tuition  in  certain  cases 77  36 

CONTRACTS— 

Board  of  directors  to  make 15  8 

Sub-directors  make  for  fuel,  &c 47  23 

When  made  by  sub-director,  must  be  approved 47  23 

With  teachers,  must  be  in  writing 51  24 

To  be  filed  with  president 51  24 

COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT— 

To  recommend  plans  for  school-houses 15  8 

May  form  sub-districts  in  certain  cases 25  14 

Transmit  order  to  secretary 25  14 

To  examine  teachers 64  30 

May  employ  assistant  examiners 64  30 

Give  certificate  on  satisfactory  examination 65  30 

To  keep  record  of  examinations , 66  31 

^JVIay  receive  fee  for  special  examinations 67  31 

In  his  absence  may  appoint  deputy  examiners 68  31 

Issue  certificates  to  persons  recommended  by  deputy 68  31 

May  revoke  teacher's  certificate , 69  31 

Make  annual  report  to  superintendent  of  public  instruction 70  32 

File  statement  of  number  of  youths  with  clerk  of  board  of  super- 
visors   70  32 

Forfeiture  for  failure  to  make  reports 71  32 

Conform  to  instructions  of  superintendent  of  public  instruction.    72  32 
Organ    of  communication    between  state  superintendent,    and 

school  authorities , 72  32 

Report  to  superintendent  of  institution  for  blind 73  33 

Report  to  superintendent  of  institution  for  deaf  and  dumb 74 

Compensation 75  33 

Visit  schools 75  33 

File  sworn  statement  of  accounts 75 

May  release  board  from  obligation  to  have  school  taught 76  34 

vMay  require  teachers  to  attend  institute 81 

Entertain  appeals  from  district  board  of  directors 123  51 

Notify  district  secretary  of  appeal 126  52 

Notify  adversly  interested  parties 127  53 

Hear  and  determine  appeal 128  54 

Can  not  render  judgment  for  money 130  58 

To  meet  superintendent  of  public  instruction  in  convention 131  58 

s^-  Make  provision  for  institutes 137  59 

COUNTY  TREASURER— 

To  pay  tax  collected,  to  district  treasurer -59  28 


TO    SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  105 

Sec.  Page. 
COUNTY  TREASURER— CONTINUED— 

Render  statement  of  amount  uncollected 59  28 

Pay  over  amount  in  his  hands  quarterly 59  28 

Keep  amount  of  tax   for  school-house  purposes  separate  in  each 

sub-district 59  28 

Keep  separate  accounts  with  independent  districts 59  28 

Pay  taxes  to  independent  districts  monthly 29 

Give  notice  to  district  president  of  amount  collected  for  each 

fund  quarterly 60  28 

Pay  taxes  to  district  treasurer  on  warrants 60  28 

DISTRICT  TOWNSHIPS  - 

Each  civil  township  a  school  district 1  1 

When  left  without  officers,  notice  of  election 3  1 

When  divided,  division  of  assets  and  liabilities 4  1 

When  divided  old  board  to  act 4  1 

First  organization  of 4  1 

A  body  corporate 5 

Boundaries  charged  when 25  14 

Liable  for  tuition  in  certain  cases. 77  36 

DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  MEETING— 

When  held 6  3 

Powers  of  electors  at 7  3 

May  direct  sale  of  property 7  3 

Determine  additional  branches  to  be  taught 7 

Delegate  powers  to  board  of  directors 7 

Vote  tax  for  school-house  fund,  libraries  and  apparatus 7 

Notice  of,  to  be  given  by  secretary 35  19 

Hours  of,  must  be  stated  in  notice 35  19 

May  direct  foreign  languages  to  be  taught 83  38 

Provide  for  payment  of  judgments 91  41 

Hours  of  organization  and  adjournment 93  42 

DISTRICT  TREASURER— 

Appointed  by  board  of  directors 13  7 

May  be  selected  from  board,  when 13  7 

Vacancy,  how  filled 18  10 

Must  give  bond 19  10 

Compensation  fixed  by  board  of  directors 21  11 

Charged  with  warrants  drawn  in  his  favor 37  19 

Hold  all  moneys  belonging  to  the  district 41  21 

Pay  out  funds  upon  order  of  president,  countersigned  by  sec- 
retary   , 41  21 

Keep  separate  accounts  with  each  fund 42  21 

Make  partial  payment  on  orders 42  21 


106  INDEX 

DISTRICT  TREASURER— CONTINUED— 

Receive  money  apportioned  to  district  township 43  22 

Register  orders 44  23 

Render  statement  of  finances 45  23 

Books  open  for  inspection 45  33 

To  negotiate  bonds  (in  independent  districts) 116  49 

To  countersign  bonds  when  negotiated 116  49 

To  be  charged  on  his  official  bond  with  all  bonds  delivered  to 

him 116  49 

EDUCATIONAL  BOARD  OF  EXAMINERS— 

Created 138  00 

Consent  of  faculty  of  state  university 138  60 

Professor  of  normal  department  to  be  chairman 138  60 

Secretary  of  university  board  ex  officio  secretary 138  60 

Annual  session 139  61 

Special  sessions 139  61 

To  examine  candidates  for  certificates  139  61 

Required  standard  of  qualification 139  61 

Keep  record  of  proceedings 140  01 

Procure  a  seal 140  61 

Cause  form  of  certificate  to  be  printed 140  61 

Certificates  issued  to  teachers 141  61 

Holder  of  certificate  may  teacb  in  any  county 141  61 

Certificate  perpetual  unless  revoked 141  61 

Revocation  of  certificate  to  be  published 141  61 

Report  revocation  to  superintendent  of  public  instruction  141  61 

To  receive  no  compensation 142  62 

Expenses,  etc.,  to  be  paid  by  trustees  of  state  university 142  62 

Secretary's  compensation 142  62 

PINES  AND  PENALTIES— 

Of  district  secretary  for  failure  to  report    40  21 

Of  county  superintendent  for  failure  to  report 71  32 

To  whom  they  shall  enure 88  39 

Suit  for  collection  of 88  39 

Of  any  school  officer  for  failure  to  deliver  books  and  papers  to 

his  successor 94  42 

FUNDS— 

Secretary  to  keep  separate  accounts  with  each 37  19 

School-house  fund  defined 42  21 

Contingent  fund  defined 42  21 

Teachers'  fund  defined 42  21 

Separate  account  with  each,  to  be  kept  by  treasurer 42  21 

Received  by  district  treasurer 43  22 

Teachers'  and  contingent,  limited ' 54  25 


TO    SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  1Q7 

No.      Page. 
FORMS— 

Of  notice  of  election  in  new  townships,  or  where  a  district  is 

left  without  officers 1  71 

Of  proceedings  of  district  township  meeting 2  71 

Of  notice  of  sub-district  meeting 3  72 

Of  proceedings  of  sub-district  meeting 4  73 

Of  certificate  of  election  of  sub-director 5  74 

Of  oath  of  sub  director 6  74 

Of  certificate  by  sub-director  to  secretrry 7  74 

Of  proceedings  of  meeting   of  board  of  directors  to  form  sub- 
districts 8  75 

Of  certificate  by  secretary  to  board  of  supervisors  of  the  amount 

of  tax  voted  by  board  of  directors 9  76 

Of  draft  by  president  upon  county  treasurer  10  77 

Of  order  on  district  treasurer 11  77 

Of  order  register  for  secretary  and  treasurer 12  78 

Of  notice  of  regular  district  township  meeting 13  78 

Of  certificate  of  secretary  to  board  of  supervisors  of  amount  of 

tax  voted  by  district  township  meeting 14  79 

Of  annual  report  of  secretary 15  80 

Of  treasurer's  account  with  teachers'  fund 16  83 

Of  list  of  heads  of  families  to  be  kept  by  sub-director  , 17  83 

Of  contract  for  building  school-house 18  84 

Of  bond  for  performance  of  contract 19  85 

Of  contract  between  sub-director  and  teacher ". 20  86 

Of  lease 21  86 

Of  deed 22  87 

Of  notice  from  clerk  of  board  of  supervisors  to  district  president  23  (a)    88 

Of  notice  from  the  county  treasurer  to  the  district  president 23  (6)     89 

Of  teacher's  daily  register , 24  90 

Of  teacher's  general  register 25  92 

Of  teacher's  certificate 26  93 

Of  revocation  of  teacher's  certificate 27  93 

Of  oath  of  school  officers 28  94 

Of  certificate  of  appointment  of  school  officers 29  94 

Of  application  for  teachers'  institute 30  95 

Of  affidavit  for  appeal 31  96 

Of  notice  of  appeal 32  96 

Of  transcript  from  district  secretary 33  97 

Of  notice  of  time  of  hearing 34  98 

Of  superintendent's  minutes. 35  98 

Of  superintendent's  transcript 36  99 

GENERAL  PROVISIONS-  Sec. 

Schools  to  be  taught  in  each  sub-district 76  34 


108  INDEX 

GENERAL  PROVISIONS— CONTINUED— 

Persons  in  military  service  during  minority  admitted 76  34 

Children  may  attend  in  another  district  township 77  36 

County  auditor  shall  deduct  cost  of  tuition,  when 77  36 

Time  when  pupil  acquires  residence,  immaterial 78  36 

Pupil  when  temporarily  sojourning  may  attend 78  36 

Pupil  may  attend  in  any  sub-district 79  37 

School  month 80  37 

Schools  closed  during  institute 81  37 

All  teachers  must  attend  institute 81  37 

Bible  shall  not  be  excluded  from  school 82  38 

German  or  other  language  may  be  taught 83  38 

Board  may  subscribe  for  Iowa  School  Journal 84  39 

Copies  subscribed  for,  form  part  of  library 85  39 

Change  of  text-books  restricted 86  39 

Appropriation  to  sectarian  institutions  forbidden 87  39 

Fines  and  penalities 88  39 

Suit  brought  in  name  of  township 88  39 

District  composed  of  parts  of  counties 89  40 

District  formerly  existing  may  be  reorganized 90  41 

Judgment,  how  satisfied 91  41 

Borrowed  school  fund,  how  paid 92  41 

Hours  for  opening  and  closing  polls 93  42 

Officer  superseded 94  42 

Jurisdiction  of  district  township  board 95  42 

GERMAN— 

And  other  language  may  be  taught 83  38 

HOLIDAYS— 

Teachers  entitled  to  (Note  d)   81  37 

INDEPENDENT  DISTRICTS— 

Division  of  assets  and  liabilities 4  1 

Tax  for,  county  treasurer  to  pay  over  monthly 59  28 

Polls  at  election  in,  time  open 93      .  42 

Board  of  directors  of  district  township  not,  to  have  jurisdiction  in .  95  42 
City  or  town  containing,  within  recorded  plat,  300  inhabitants 

may  organize *  *  *  * 96  42 

Directors  of  district  township  to  establish  boundaries 97  43 

Notice  for  first  meeting  of  electors 97  43 

Electors  to  vote  for  or  against  separate  organization 97  43 

Notice  for  first  meeting  of  election  of  officers 98  44 

Term  of  office  of  directors  determined  by  lot 98  44 

Who  constitute  the  board  ®f  directors 98  44 

Organization  of  meeting 99  45 


TO    SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  109 

Sec.  Page. 
INDEPENDENT  DISTRICTS— CONTINUED— 

Must  be  completely  organized  before  the  first  of  August 100  45 

Taxes  levied  by  district  township  to  be  7oid 100  45 

Board  to  levy  taxes 100  45 

When  formed  of  parts  of  two  or  more  district  townships,  by  whom 

notice  given 101  45 

May  have  schools,  wards,  etc 102  46 

Governed  by  same  laws  as  district  townships 102  46 

Electors  may  vote  tax  of  ten  mills  for  purchase  of  grounds  and 

erection  of  school-houses 103  46 

Annual  meeting 104  46 

Election  of  officers 104  46 

Who  are  judges  of  election 104  46 

Boundaries  may  be  changed,  how 105  46 

May  consolidate 106  47 

Electors  to  vote  for  or  against .' 106  47 

Statement  of  disbursements,  etc 107  47 

Corporate  name  of 108  47 

Sub-districts  may  be  constituted  independent  districts 109  47 

Election  to  be  called  110  47 

Meetings  called  in  sub-districts Ill  48 

Three  directors  chosen,  when Ill  48 

One  director  c  hosen  annually Ill  48 

Name  determined  by  ballot 1 112  48 

Name  may  be  changed,  when 112  48 

Governed  by  laws  for  independent  districts 113  48 

Old  board  to  divide  assets  and  liabilities 114  48 

May  borrow  money  and  issue  bonds 115  48 

Limit  of  indebtedness 115  48 

Board  of  directors  to  submit  question  of  issuing  bonds  to  electors .  116  49 

What  notice  of  meeting  required 116  49 

Board  to  issue  bonds  in  accordance  with  vote  of  electors 116  49 

Denomination  and  time  of  bonds 116  49 

Must  be  negotiated  at  par 116  49 

School  board  vote  tax  if  electors  neglect 117  49 

Orders  draw  six  per  cent,  after  presentation 118  50 

INTEREST— 

Rate  of  on  bonds  issued  by  independent  district. 115  48 

Rate  of  on  school  orders 118  50 

IOWA  SCHOOL  JOURNAL— 

Boards  of  directors  may  subscribe  for 84  39 

Superintendent  of  public  instruction  may  subscribe  for 133  58 

Decision  of  superintendent  of  public  instruction  to  be  published 

in..                                                                                                   .  133  58 


HO  INDEX 

JUDGMENT- 

Against  district  township,  how  satisfied 91  41 

County  superintendent  and  superintendent  of  public  instruction 

cannot  render,  for  money 130  58 

LIBRARY— 

Electors  may  vote  tax  for 

(  lOd  46 

School  journal  shall  remain  part  of 85  39 

OATH  OF  OFFICE— 

By  whom  administered 40  23 

OFFICERS— 

Fines  collected  from 88  39 

Suit  against 88  39 

When  superseded,  must  deliver  books  and  papers  to  successors. .  94  42 

Penalty  for  non-compliance 94  42 

PRESIDENT  OF  THE  DISTRICT— 

May  call  special  meetings  of  the  board 14           8 

Appointed  by  board  of  directors 18  10 

File 'bonds  ot  secretary  and  treasurer 19  10 

Preside  at  board  and  district  meetings 32  17 

Sign  drafts,  orders  and  contracts 32  17 

In  suits,  appear  for  district 33  18 

(32  17 

To  draw  drafts  on  county  treasurer -J  4t  21 

(GO  28 

Must  file  teachers'  contracts 51  24 

To  sign  bonds  issued  for  school  house  fund 116  49 

PUPILS— 

Number  of  to  be  reported  by  secretary 39  20 

Enumeration  of 48  24 

May  be  dismissed  from  school 50  24 

Separate  register  kept  for  non-resident  pupils 62  29  ( 

Required  age  of 76  34 

In  military  service 76  34 

May  attend  school  in  adjoining  district  townships 77  36 

Resident,  attend  school  regardless  of  time 78  36 

Non-resident,  to  pay  tuition 78  36 

May  attend  in  another  sub-district 79  37 

Not  coerced  to  read  the  Bible 82  38 

SCHOOLS- 
NO,  and  duration  of,  determined  by  board 16           9 

Graded  or  union 17  10 

One  or  more  in  each  sub-district 76  34 

Age  of  pupils 7o  34 


TO    SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA 

Sec.  Page. 
SCHOOLS— CONTINUED— 

Duration  of,  required  by  law 76  34 

Minor  soldiers  admitted 76  34 

Children  may  attend  in  adjoining  district  township 77  36 

Resident  pupils  may  attend 78  36 

Non-resident  pupils  to  pay  tuition 78  36 

Pupils  may  attend  in  adjoining  sub-districts 79  37 

Suspended  during  session  of  institute 81  37 

Bible  not  to  be  excluded  from 82  38 

SCHOOL  DISTRICTS- (See  District  Townships.) 
SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITES— 

Board  to  fix 16  9 

Lawful  to  take 119  50 

Not  to  e  ceed  an  acre  without  consent  of  owner 119  50 

Orchards,  gardens,  and  parks  excluded 120  50 

Shall  be  on  public  road 120  50 

Not  within  twenty  r<'ds  of  any  residence. 120  50 

County  superintendent  to  appoint  appraisers , 121  50 

Appraisers  to  take  oath 121  50 

Duties  of  appraisers 121  50 

County  superintendent  to  give  notice  to  owner 121  50 

Appraisers  to  report  to  county  superintendent 121  50 

County  superintendent  to  file  report 121  50 

School  board  to  deposit  money  with  county  treasurer 121  50 

Either  party  may  appeal  to  circuit  court 121  50 

Appeal  final 121  50 

Appeal  not  to  delay  work  on  school-house 121  50 

School  board  not  liable  for  cost  of  appeal,  when 121  50 

School  board  to  pay  costs  of  first  assessment , 121  50 

Title  for  school  purposes  only 122  51 

Title  shall  revert,  when 122  51 

Owner  to  pay  for  improvements 122  51 

SCHOOL  LAWS— 

Superintendent  of  public  instruction  to  revise  and  codify 131  58 

To  be  printed  and  distributed 134  59 

SCHOOL  MONTH— Defined 80  37 

SCHOOL  ORDEKS— 

Not  drawn  till  claim  is  audited 21  11 

President  to  sign 32  17 

Secretary  to  countersign 34  18 

Secretary  to  keep  register  of 34  18 

Treasurer  shall  register 44  23 

Draw  six  per  cent  interest 118  50 


J12  INDEX 

Sec.  Page. 
SECRETARY  OF  THE  DISTRICT— 

To  file  statement  of  tax  apportioned  with  board  of  supervisors. .  12  6 

May  be  selected  from  board,  when 13  7 

Appointed  by  board  of  directors 18  10 

Vacancy,  how  filled 18  10 

Must  give  bond 19  10 

May  receive  compensation 21  11 

File  address  of  district  officers  with  clerk  of  board  of  supervi- 
sors, county  superintendent,  and  county  treasurer 23  13 

Deliver  plat  to  county  treasurer  and  auditor 24  13 

Record  order  of  county  superintendent 25  14 

To  certify  tax  for  teachers'  fund  and  contingent  fund  to  board  of 

supervisors 29  16 

•  Record  proceedings  of  district  board  and  district  meetings 34  18 

Preserve  copies  of  annual  report 34  18 

File  all  business  papers 34  18 

Countersign  drafts  and  orders 34  18 

Keep  register  of  orders 34  18 

Furnish  treasurer  with  transcript  of  orders 34  18 

Give  notice  of  district  township  meeting 35  19 

Keep  account  of  district  expenses 36  19 

Debit  and  credit  treasurer 37  19 

Keep  separate  account  with  each  fund 37  19 

Certify  amount  of  tax  to  board  of  supervisors 38  19 

Report  to  county  superintendent 39  20 

Penalty  for  failure  to  report 40  21 

Shall  certify  sums  to  board  of  supervisors 54  25 

Countersign  draft  on  county  treasurer 60  28 

File  account  of  tuition 77  36 

Make  transcript  in  case  of  appeal 126  53 

SUB-DIRECTOR— 

First  election  of ' 2  1 

Special  election  when  district  township  is  left  without  officers  3  1 

Election  of 8  4 

To  give  notice  of  sub-district  meeting 8  4 

Number  of. 10  5 

To  certify  tax  to  district  township  meeting 11  5 

Vacancy  in  oflice  of,  how  filled 18  10 

Discharge  teacher  by  direction  of  board 22  12 

Act  under  rules  made  by  board 30  17 

Take  oath 46  23 

May  administer  the  official  oath 46  213 

May  employ  teachers,  purchase  fuel,  etc 47 

Have  control  of  school-house 47  23 

Contracts  to  be  approved 47  23 


TO    SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA.  H3 

Sec.  Page. 

SU  w-DIRECTOR— CONTINUED— 

Take  enumeration  of  children. 48  24 

Make  annual  report  to  district  secretary 49  24 

May  dismiss  pupils  from  school  w,ith  concurrence  of  president...  50  24 

Visit  school 50  24 

Make  contracts  in  writing 51  24 

May  admit  pupils  to  school 79  37 

SUB-DISTRICTS  - 

As  now  organized,  continued  1 

Annual  meeting,  when  held 8  4 

Judges  of  election .» 9  5 

When  but  one  in  township,  three  directors  to  be  elected 10  5 

When  there  are  two,  one  sub-director  to  be  elected  from  each, 

and  one  from  district  at  large 10  '   -5 

Electors  to  determine  whether  they  desire  a  tax  for  school-house 

levied .  11  5 

May  be  formed  of  parts  of  two  townships 25  14 

Not  to  be  divided 56  26 

Schools  to  be  taught  in 76  34 

Scholars  in  one  may  attend  in  another 79  37 

May  be  constituted  independent  districts 109  47 

SUB-DISRICT  BOUNDARIES— 

Township  trustees  may  establish  in  new  townships 2  1 

Board  of  directors  may  establish  and   change 24  13 

Plat  and  description  must  be  made 24  13 

Must  conform  to  congressional  lines 24  13 

Change  of,  when  to  take  effect 24  13 

County  superintendent  may  establish  in  certain  cases 25  14 

Established  prior  to  March  12,  1858,  continued  in  certain  cases. .  89  40 

SUB-DISTRICT  MEETING— 

When  held 8  4 

Notice  of : 8  4 

How  organized , 9  5 

Judges  of  election 9  5 

To  elect  three  sub-directors,  when 10  5 

To  elect  sub-director   at  large,  when 10  5 

Determine  amount  required  for  school-house 11  5 

May  increase  term  of  school 29  16 

SUPERINTENDENT  OF  PUBLIC  INSTRUCTION— 

Appeals  from  county  superintendent,  how  taken. 129  56 

To  give  thirty  days'  notice  of  appeal  to  county  superintendent. .  129  56 

Like  notice  to  adverse  party 129  56 

Decision  shall  be  final 129  56 

Not  to  render  judgment  for  money 130  58 

Sl3 


114  INDEX 

SUPERINTENDNT  OF  PUBLIC  INSTRUCTION— CONTINUED— ^ 

Not  to  receive  additional  compensation  for  determining  appeals.  130  50 

Charged  with  supervision  of  schools  and  superintendents 131  58 

Meet  county  superintendents  in  convention 131  58 

Attend  teachers'  institutes  when  practicable 131  58 

Render  written  opinion  to  school  officers 131  58 

Determine  cases  of  appeal 131  58 

To  revise  and  codify  school  law 131  58 

Office  at  seat  of  government 132  58 

File  all  papers,  documents,  etc 132  58 

Keep  fair-?s<;ord  of  matters  in  office • 132  58 

Subscribe  for  Iowa  School  Journal 133  58 

Furnish  copies  of  same  to  county  superintendents 133  58 

Publish  decisions  in  Iowa  SchoolJournal 133  58 

Print  and  distribute  school  laws 134  59 

Prepare  and  distribute  form  of  teachers'  certificates 134  59 

Other  blank  forms , 134  59 

Report  number  of  children  to  auditor  of  state 135  59 

Report  to  general  assembly. 136  59 

Have  1,000  copies  of  report  printed 136  59 

Appoint  teachers'  institutes 137  59 

Transmit  funds  appropriated  to  county  superintendent . ..  137  59 

Notify  county  superintendents  of  revocation  of  certificates  by 

educational  board  of  examiners 141  61 

TAXES— 

Sub  district  meeting  may  determine  amount  for  school-house 11  5 

Not  to  exceed  ten  mills  on  the  township 12  6 

j      12  6 

Not  to  exceed  fifteen  mills  on   sub-district "J      28  15 

j      12  6 

School-house  tax  apportioned "J     28  15 

Secretary  to  file  statement  of  school- house  tax  with  board  of 

Supervisors 12  6 

For  contingent  and  teachers'  funds,  how  levied 29  16 

Not  levied  after  third  Monday  in  May 31  17 

Receivable  only  in  cash 38  19 

Not  to  exceed  $15,  per  scholar  for  teachers'  fond 54  25 

Not  to  exceed  $5,  per  scholar  for  contingent  fund 54  25 

To  pay  judgment 91  41 

Levied  by  district  township  to  be  void  in  new  independent  dis- 
trict.   100  45- 

Board  of  supervisors  to  levy 100  45 

TEACHERS— 

May  be  expelled 22  12 

Contract  withr  made  by  sub-director 47  23 


TO    SCHOOL  LAWS  OF  IOWA.  H5 

Sec.  Page. 
TEACHERS— CONTINUED— 

Contract  with,  in  writing 51  24 

Not  to  be  employed  without  certificate 61  28 

Without  certificate,  forfeit  compensation  61  28 

Keep  register  of  school 62  29 

Keep  separate  register  for  non-resident  pupils 62  29 

File  certified  copy  of  register  with  district  secretary 63  30 

Examined  by  county  superintendent 64  30 

May  receive  certificate  for  one  year 65  30 

For  special  examination,  fee  required 67  31 

Certificate  of,  may  be  revoked 69  31 

Must  attend  institute 81  37 

Entitled  to  holiday  (Note  d) . . 81  37 

Number  required  for  institute 137  59 

May  receive  perpetual  certificate 141  61 

TEACHERS'  INSTITUTE 

Schools  to  be  closed  during  session  of -81  37 

Teachers  must  attend  unless  excused  by  county  superintendent.     81  37 

Teachers  entitled  to  pay  for  time  spent  in  attendance  at  (Mote  c) .     81  37 

Provision  for 137  59 

Appropriation  of  $50,  for 139  59 

Form  of  application  for  (No.  30) 95 

TOWNSHIP  TRUSTEES— 

To  divide  new  civil  township  into  sub-districts 2  1 

To  give  notice  for  first  election  of  sub-directors 2  1 

To  give  notice  of  special  election  of  sub-directors 3  1 


CHAPTEE  II. 

COUNTY  HIGH  SCHOOLS— 

County  with  population  of  2,000,  may  establish 1  62 

Object 1  62 

Electors  may  present  petition  to  boards  of  supervisors 2  62 

Board  of  supervisors  to  give  notice 2  62 

May  vote  for,  at  general  or  special  election 2  62 

Ballots  canvassed 3  63 

Board  of  supervisors  to  appoint  board  of  trustees 3  63 

Bond  and  oath 3  63 

Trustees  elected  at  next  general  election 4  63 

Classed  by  lot 4  63 

Term  of  office 4  63 

Trustees  to  qualify. 4  63 

County  superintendent  president  of  board 5  63 


INDEX 

Sec.  Pa^e. 

COUNTY  HIGH  SCHOOLS— CONTINUED  - 

Secretary  and  treasurer  appointed , 5  63 

Trustees  to  make  estimate  of  funds  needed 6  63 

Shall  present  estimate  to  board  of  supervisors 6  63 

Tax  not  to  exceed  2  mills 6  63 

Tax  to  be  paid  to  treasurer  of  county  high  school 7  63 

Bond  of  treasurer 8  64 

Duties  of  treasurer 8  64 

Orders  to  be  signed  by  president  and  countersigned  by  secretary  8  64 

Secretary  and  treasurer  to  keep  account 8  64 

Statement  to  be  made 8  64 

Board  to  select  site  for  high  school 9  64 

Site,  to  be  without  expense  to  county 9  64 

Board  to  make  purchases  contracts  &c. 9  64 

Board  to  employ  teachers 10  64 

Model  schools  to  be  encouraged 10  64 

Tuition  free 11  64 

Apportionment  of  pupils 11  64 

Pupils  from  other  counties  may  be  admitted 12  65 

Tax  in  counties  destitute  of  high  schools 13  65 

Rules  and  regulations  for  school 14  65 

Trustees  to  make  annual  report 15  65 

Copy  of  report  to  be  sent  to  Supt.  Pub.  Inst 15  65 

Vacancies  in  board 16  65 

Compensation  of  trustees 17  66 


CHAPTER  III. 


STATE  UNIVERSITY— 

Object  and  location 1  66 

Course  of  study ;  where  to  commence 1  66 

Students  who  have  not  completed  elementary  branches  not  ad- 
mitted   1  66 

No  religious  denomination  to  control 2  66 

Governed  by  board  of  regents 3  66 

Governor,  president  of  the  board  3  66 

Superintendent  of  public  instruction  and  president  of  university 

members  of  board 3  66 

One  member  from  each  Cong.  Dist.  elected  by  the  gen'l  assembly  3  66 

Members  divided  into  classes 4  66 

Term  of  office 4  66 

Vacancy,  how  filled , 4  66 

Departments  determined  by  board  of  regents 5  67 


TO  SCHOOL  LAWS   OF  IOWA.  H7 

Sec. 


STATE   UNIVERSITY— CONTINUED— 

May  confer  degrees  and  grant  diplomas 5  67 

Meetings 6  67 

Special  meetings  called  by  president  or  three  members 6  67 

Executive  Com.  to  audit  claims 7  67 

Chairman  to  dra,w  orders 7  67 

Orders  to  be  countersigned  by  secretary 7  67 

Record  of  expenditures  to  be  kept  by  committee 7  67 

Record  to  be  submitted  to  board 7  67 

Secretary  elected 8  67 

Duties  of  secretary 8  67 

Treasurer  elected  9  68 

Duties  of  treasurer 9  68 

Oath  and  bond 9  68 

Sureties  to  be  approved  by  board 9  68 

To  keep  set  of  books 10  68 

Treasurer  to  institute  suit,  when 11  68 

Board  of  regents  shall  enact  laws  for  government  of  university.  12  68 

Appoint  president,  professors  and  tutors 12  68 

Determine  salaries  of  officers 12  68 

Purchase  apparatus,  etc 13  69 

All  specimens  collected  by  state  geologist  to  be  property  of  the 

sfate 14  69 

Sales  of  land 15  69 

Funds  may  be  invested 15  69 

Funds  not  to  be  used  for  ordinary  expenses  ot  the  institution. ...  15  69 

President  to  report  to  board  of  regents  16  69 

Br>ard  to  report  to  superintendent  of  public  instruction 17  7ft 

No  compensation  except  mileage . .    18  70 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


APPEAL     CASES, 


BY 


THE  SECRETARY  OP  THE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION 


AND 


THE  SUPERINTENDENT  OF  PUBLIC  INSTRUCTION. 


COMPILED 


FOR 


THE  USE  OF  SCHOOL  OFFICERS 


BY 


AL01STZO    ABERNETHY, 

SUPERINTRNDKNT  OF   PITBTJC  INSTRUCTION. 


DES  MOINES: 

G.  W.  EDWARDS,  STATE  PRINTER, 
1872. 


PREFACE. 


The  School  Law  Decisions  published  in  1868  by  the  late  Hon. 
D.  F.  Wells,  proved  to  be  of  great  value  to  county  superintendents 
in  the  determination  of  appeal  cases ;  to  school  officers  in  the  exer- 
cise of4 their  official  duties;  also  to  parties  in  conducting  appeals  be- 
fore the  county  superintendents  and  the  Superintendent  of  Public 
Instruction. 

The  settlement  of  difficulties,  and  the  means  of  redressing  wrongs 
afforded  by  this  method  of  appeals  is  inexpensive,  and,  it  is  believed, 
has  given  general  satisfaction,  and  in  most  cases,  been  the  means  of 
securing  substantial  justice. 

These  decisions  are  republished  with  the  addition  of  the  more  im- 
portant ones  rendered  since  1868,  in  the  hope  that  their  dissemination 
will  diminish  the  number  of  appeals,  and  contribute  to  a  more  sys- 
tematic and  just  administration  of  the  school  laws. 

One  copy  will  be  furnished  each  county  superintendent  and  each 
board  of  directors  in  the  State  for  official  use,  and  for  transmis- 
sion to  successors  in  office. 

The  labor  of  preparing  these  decisions,  and  the  full  additional  di- 
gests placed  at  the  head  of  each,  has  been  performed  mainly  by 
J.  W.  Stewart,  Deputy  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction,  whose 
thorough  knowledge  of  the  school  laws,  and  the  principles  underly- 
ing the  decisions  from  this  department,  and  whose  legal  ability  have 
given  me  valuable  aid  in  this  work,  for  which  I  desire  to  give  him 
credit. 

ALONZO  ABEKNETHY. 
^Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

DES  MOINES,  IOWA,  August,  1872. 


TABLE    OF   OASES. 


A 


LBION,  District  Township  of,  Smith  v 22 

Archer  v.  District  Township  of  Warren 126 


B 


ELL  v.  District  Township  of  Morning  Sim 1 

Belmont,  District  Township  of,  Moorman  v 102 

Black  Hawk,  District  Township  of,  Moore  v 92 

Bleckley  v.  District  Township  of  Cedar 118 

Bloomficld,  District  Township  of,  Devin  v 31 

Boomer,  District  Township  of,   Remington  y 110 

Boynton  v.  District  Township  of  Lodomillo 113 

Bradford  and  King  v.  District  Township  of  Lime  Creek 5 

Brand  v.  District  Township  of  Morgan 14 

Brandon,  District  Township  of,  Kelsall  v 50 

Brown  v.  District  Township  of  Richland 20 

Brown,  District  Township  of,  Gordon  v (58,  81 

Buckeye,  Independent  District  of,  Towns  v 51) 

Burch  v.  District  Township  of  Hickory  Grove 15 

Burlington,  District  Township  of,  Jones  v 45 


(  'ASP 


ASTLE  Grove,  District  Township  of,  Heisey  v 66 

Cedar,  District  Township   of,  Bleckley  v 118 

Cedar,  District  Township  of,  Dayton  v 128 

Cedar,  District  Township  of,  Miner  v 97 

Center,  District  Township  of,  Deremo  v 8 

Charitou,  District  Township  of,  Whicker  v 123 

Cheney  v.  District  Township  of  Pleasant  Valley 132 

Clark  v.  District  Township  of  Wayne 43 

Coffin's  Grove,  District  Township  of,  Smith  v 63 

Coffin's  Grove,  District  Township  of,  Trumble  v 100 

Competing  District  Township  of,  McReynolds  v 30 

Crane  v.  District  Township  of  Montrose 16 

Cresro,  District  Township  of,  Norton  v 83 

Curry  v.  District  Township  of  Franklin 76 

I  /  AYTON  v  District  Township  of  Cedar 128 

Deerfleld,  District  Township  of,  Stone  and  Lovelace  v 99 

Delaware  District  Township  of,  Independent  District  of  Manchester  v 6 

Deremo  v.  District  Township  of  Center 8 

Drviii  v.  District  Township  of  Bloomrield 37 

Dobbins  and  Briggs  v.  District  Township  of  Salem 34 


Vi  CONTENTS. 

Dougherty  v.  Tracy  County  Superintendent 56 

Draper  v.  District  Township  of  Lick  Creek. .  47 


E 


DWARDS  v.  District  Township  of  West  Point 69 

Emmetsburg,  District  Township  of  Kane  v .  117 


F 


AIRFIELD,  District  Township  of,  Kauffman  v 3 

Fairfield,  District  Township  of,  Reed  v 67 

Flynn  v.  District  Township  of  Whitebreast 40 

Forker  v.  District  Township  of  Richland Ill 

Franklin,  District  Township  of,  Curry  v. 7(5 

Fremont  District  Township  of,  Huskins  v. . . 114 

Fremont,  Independent  District  of,  Hook  v 109 

UALLANT'S  Grove,  District  Township  of,  Mclntosh  v 31 

German,  District  Township  of,  Steigelder  v 33 

Gordon  v.  District  Township  of  Brown 08,  81 

Grattan  v.  District  Township  of  Ludlow. .  02 


R 


L ALL    v.  District  Township  of  Massilon 103 

Hamilton,  District  Township  of,  Ockerman  v 53 

Hanover,  District  Township  of,  McNutt  v 29 

Hardin,  District  Township  of,  Prinyer  v 120 

Harris  v.  District  Township  of  Lee 100 

Harvey  v.  District  Township  of  Stapleton 135 

Heisey  v.  District  Township  of  Castle  Grove 00 

Hickory  Grove,  District  Township  ot,  Burch  v 15 

Hicks  v.  District  Township  of  Pleasant  and  Mantua 108 

Hook  v.  Independent  District  of  Fremont. 109 

Huskins  v.  District  Township  of  Fremont.    114 


OWA,  District  Township  of,  Schnoeblin  v 40 


d  ACOBSON  v.  District  Township  of  Lafayette 131 

Jefferson,  District  Township  of,  Redler  v 119 

Johnson  v.  District  Township  of  Monroe 30 

Jones  v.  District  Township  of  Burlington 45 

Jones  v.  District  Township  of  Salem 74 


.ANE  v.  District  Township  of  Emmetsburg 117 

Kauffman  v.  District  Township  of  Fairfield 3 

Kelsall  v.  District  Township  of  Brandon 50 

King  et  al.,  v.  District  Township  of  Spring  Creek 39 


L 


AFAYETTE,  District  Township  of,  Jacobson  v   131 

Lee,  District  Township'of,  Harris  v 106 

Lester,  District  Township  of,  Sipple  v 93 

Lick  Creek,  District  Township  of,  Draper  v 47 


CONTENTS.  yJl 

Lime  Creek,  District  Township  of,  Bradford  &  King  v 5 

Lodomillo,  District  Township  of,  Boynton  v 113 

Ludlow,  District  Township  of,  Grattan  v 62 

Ludlow,  District  Township  of,  Markley  v 85 


I. 


. AKEE,  District  Township  of,  Taylor  v 25 

Manchester,  Independent  District  of,  v.  District  Township  of  Delaware 6 

Maquoketa,  District  Township  of,  Markle  v 28 

Maquoketa,  District  Township  of,  Smith  v 72 

Markle,  v.  District  Township  of  Maquoketa 28 

Markley  v.  District  Township  of  Ludlow 85 

Marshall,  Independent  District  of,  Noble  v 89 

Mason  v.  District  Township  of  Otter  Creek 7 

Massilon,  District  Township  of,  Hall  v 103 

McHenry  v.  District  Township  of  Rock  Grove 4 

Mclntosh  v.  District  Township  of  Gallant's  Grove 31 

McNutt  v.  District  Township  of  Hanover 29 

McKeynolds  v.  District  Township  of  Competine 30 

Miner  v.  District  Township  of  Cedar 97 

Morgan,  District  Township  of,  Brand  v 14 

Monroe,  District  Township  of,  Johnson  v 36 

Montrose,  District  Township  of,  Crane  v 16 

Moore  v.  District  Township  of  Black  Hawk 92 

Moorman  v.  District  Township  of  Belmont ¥ 102 

Morning  Sun,  District  Township  of,  Bell  v 1 

Mosalem,  District  Township  of,  District  Township  of  Washington  v 12 

Mullin  v.  District  Township  of  Perry ,. . .  105 


N 


EAL  v.  District  Township  of  Washington 107 

New  Albany,  District  Township  of,  Waltz  v 121 

Nichols  v.  Roberts,  County  Superintendent 42 

Noble  v.  Independent  District  of  Marshall 89 

Norton  v.  District  Township  of  Cresco 83 


0 


CKERMAN  v.  District  Township  of  Hamilton 53 

Otter  Creek,  District  Township  of,  Mason  v , 7 


P 


ALMYRA,  District  Township  of,  Wade  v 4 

Peck  et  al.,  v.  District  Township  of  Polk 115 

Perry,  District  Township  of,  Mullin  v 105 

Pleasant  and  Mantua,  District  Townships  of,  Hicks  v 108 

Pleasant  Ridge,  District  Township  of,  Williamson  v 48 

Pleasant  Valley,  District  Township  of,  Cheney  v 132 

Polk,  District  Township  of,  Peck  v 1 1'5 

Price  v.  District  Township  of  State  Center 00 

Prinycr  v.  District  Township  of  Hardin 120 

Pryne  v.  District  Township  of  York \\% 


viii  CONTENTS. 

liEDLER  v.  District  Township  of  Jefferson 110 

Reed  v.  District  Township  Fairfield (; ; 

Remington  v.  District  Township  of  Boomer 110 

Richland,  District  Township  of,  Forker  v 111 

Richland,  District  Township  of,  Brown  v 20 

Roberts,  County  Superintendent,  Nichols  v 42 

Rock  Grove,  District  Township  of,  McHenry  v I 


I^ALEM, 


[,  District  Township  of,  Dobbins  &  Briggs  v :M 

Salem,  District  Township  of,  Jones  v 74 

Schnoeblin  v.  District  Township  of  Iowa 40 

Sharp  v.  District  Township  of  Walnut 10 

Sipple  v.  District  Township  of  Lester !>:; 

Smith  v.  District  Township  of  Albion 22 

Smith  v.  District  Township  of  Coffin's  Grove (;;} 

Smith  v.  District  Township  of  Maquoketa 72 

Spring  Creek,  District  Township  of,  King  et  al.,  v 39 

Spring  Creek,  District  Township  of,,  Stoutenbaugh  v 49 

Stapleton,  District  Township  of,  Harvey  v 135 

State  Center,  District  Township  of,  Price  v ('»() 

Steigelder  v.  District  Township  of  German 33 

Stine  v.  District  Township  of  Wahkonsa 27 

Stone  &  Loveless  v.  District  Township  of  Deerfieid '.»'.) 

Stoutenbaugh  v.  District  Township  of  Spring  Creek 4!) 


T 


AYLOR  v.  District  Township  of  Makee 25 

Towns  v.  Independent  District  of  Buckeye 59 

Tracy,  County  Superintendent,  Dougherty  v ft; 

Trumble  v.  District  Township  of  Coffins'  Grove  100 

Tunison  &  Roy  v.  District  Township  of  Wilton 7S 


W 


ADE  v.  District  Township  of  Palmyra 4 

Wahkonsa,  District  Township  of,  Stine  v 27 

Walnut,  District  Township  of,  Sharp  v 10 

Waltz  v.  District  Township  of  New  Albany 121 

Warren,  District  Township  of,  Archer  v 12(5 

Washington,  District  Township  of,  v.  District  Township  of  Mosalem 12 

Washington,  District  Township  of,  Neal  v •  •  107 

Wayne,  District  Township  of,  Clark  v 43 

West  Point,  District  Township  of,  Edwards  v W 

Whicker  v.  District  Township  of  Chariton 123 

Whitebreast,  District  Township  of,  Flynn  v 40 

Wilton,  District  Township  of,  Tunison  and  Roy  v 78 

Williamson  v.  District  Township  of  Pleasant  Ridge 48 


Y 


ORK,  District  Township  of,  Pryne  v H2 


SCHOOL    LAW    DECISIONS. 


WILLIAM  BELL,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  MORN- 
ING SUN. 

Appeal  from  Louisa  County. 

1.     SUB- DIRECTOR.     A  sub-director  continues  in  office  until  his  successor  is 
elected  and  qualified.     Sec.  2U97,  Revision  1800. 

2. Failure  to  qualify  anew  does  not  create  a  vacancy. 

3.    Sub  directors  are  not  entitled  to  compensation  for  official  services. 


4.  SCHOOL-HOUSE  TAX.  In  levying  tax  for  school-house  purposes  the  board 
may  make  such  apportionment  as  jusiice  may  require,  provided  the  rate  does 
not  exceed  ten  mills  on  the  dollar. 

The  testimony  in  this  case  shows,  that  en  the  first  Monday  in 
March,  1862,  only  two  sub-districts  in  the  district  township  of 
Morning  Sun  in  said  county,  held  an  election,  and  elected  sub- 
directors,  to-wit:  sub-districts  numbers  Three  and  Seven.  On  the 
10th  clay  of  March,  1862,  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district 
township  held  a  meeting,  at  which  Thomas  McCluskin  and  W.  L. 
Lyrnan,  sub-directors  elect  from  sub-districts  numbers  Three  and 
Seven,  appeared  and  were  sworn  in.  There  being  no  quorum 
present,  the  board  adjourned  to  meet  again  on  the  24th  day  of 
March,  1862,  at  wh'ch  time  sundry  members,  who  had  been  elected 
for  the  year  previous,  tendered  their  resignations,  and  the  vacancies 
thus  created  were  filled  by  appointment,  and  a  president  and 
treasurer  were  elected.  On  the  12th  day  of  April,  1862,  the  time 
fixed  by  law  for  the  regular  meeting,  the  board  met  and  performed 
sundry  ofiicial  acts,  and  adjourned  to  meet  again  on  the  17th  day  oi 
May,  1862,  at  which  time  certain  other  official  business  was  trans- 
acted, after  which  they  adjourned  sine  die. 

Mr.  William  Bell  takes  exceptions  to  the  whole  procedure  and 
appeals  to  the  county  superintendent,  on  the  ground  in  substance, 
that  the  board  of  directors  had  no  legal  existence  from  and  after 
the  13th  day  of  March,  1862,  with  the  exception  of  the  members 
from  sub-districts  numbers  Three  and  Seven,  and  that  some  of  their 
acts  were  not  warranted  by  law,  even  if  they  had  been  legally  con- 
stituted. The  county  superintendent  sustained  the  action  of  the 

si 


SCHOOL  LMV  DECISIONS. 


William  Bell  v.  The  District  Township  of  Morning  Sun. 


board  with  one  or  two  exceptions,  upon  which  Mr.  Bell  appealed  to 
the  secretary  of  the  board  of  education. 

There  is  but  one  question  of  importance  involved  in  this  case,  to- 
wit:  Was  the  board  a  legally  constituted  body  from  and  after  the 
13th  day  of  March,  1862,  or,  to  use  the  language  of  the  appellant, 
"ten  days  after  the  first  Monday  in  March?"  It  appears  to  be 
admitted  that  they  were  so  so  constituted  prior  to  that  time.  If  so, 
then  it  follows  that  they  were  so  constituted  subsequent  to  that 
time;  for  nothing  transpired  at  that  time  to  produce  any  change. 
The  law  provides  (Sec.  57,  Part  VIII,  Laws  of  1860)  that,  "  Any 
officer  whose  term  of  office  is  prescribed  by  this  act  shall  continue 
in  office  until  his  successor  is  elected  and  qualified."  It  is  evident 
then  under  this  provision  that  the  sub-directors  whose  successors 
had  not  been  elected  and  qualified,  were  authorized  to  hold  over  for 
the  ensuing  year,  and  hence  the  existence  of  the  board  was  pei- 
petuated  with  the  same  legal  qualifications  and  powers  that  it 
possessed  on  the  first  Monday  in  March,  1862.  The  resignation 
and  appointment  of  certain  members,  though  totally  unnecessary, 
was  nevertheless  legal,  and  does  not  affect  the  case. 

The  only  possible  question  that  can  arise  as  to  the  correctness 
of  this  construction  is  whether  the  failure  of  members  holding  over 
to  qualify  anew  within  ten  days  after  the  first  Monday  in  March 
would  create  a  vacancy.  I  am  fully  satisfied  that  it  would  not. 
There  is  no  provision  in  the  school  law  requiring  it.  There  is  a 
general  statute  of  this  kind  (Sec.  568,  Revision  of  1860);  but  it  is 
not  applicable  to  school  officers;  for  under  our  constitution  all 
acts  providing  for  the  election  and  defining  the  duties  of  school 
officers,  must  originate  with  the  board  of  education.  The  general 
assembly  can  pass  no  such  law,  except  by  way  of  amendment  to 
an  act  passed  by  the  board  of  education.  The  section  referred  to 
originated  with  the  general  assembly  and  has  never  been  sanc- 
tioned by  any  legislation  of  the  board  of  education,  and  hence  it 
cannot  apply  to  school  officers.  This  construction  is  in  accordance 
with  the  decision  of  the  supreme  court  (See  Tth  Iowa  Report,  263, 
The  District  Township)  of  Dubuque  v.  The  City  of  Jjubuque.} 
See,  also,  my  circular  of  December  9th,  1861,  hereto  appended.  It 
is  proper  to  add,  that  with  the  view  ot  preventing  even  a  quibble  on 
the  subject,  I  have  uniformly  recommended  that  school  officers 
holding  over  should  quality  anew;  but  my  recommendation  is  not 
law,  and  therefore  not  binding. 

The  board  being  legally  constituted,  it  only  remains  to  pass  upon 
the  legality  of  their  acts,  and  in  doing  so  I  find  but  two  to  which  I 
can  take  exception,  to-wit:  the  allowance  of  compensation  to  sub- 
directors,  and  the  alteration  of  sub-district  boundaries.  The  law 
does  not  provide  for  the  compensation  of  sub-directors,  and  hence, 


[SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


J.icob  Kauffman  v.  District  Township  of  Fail-field. 


the  allowance  was  illegal.  It  is  done,  however,  in  many  districts 
by  mutual  consent.  The  only  question  as  to  the  legality  of  the 
action  of  the  board  relative  to  sub-district  boundaries  is:  were  the 
the  changes  "  such  as  justice,  equity,  and  the  interests  of  the  people 
require?"  The  remonstrances  against  the  alterations  would  seem  to 
indicate  plainly  that  they  were  not.  In  levying  the  tax  for  school- 
house  purposes,  the  board  may  make  such  apportionment  "  as 
justice  may  require,"  provided  the  rate  does  not  exceed  jfe  mills  on 
on  the  dollar  (ten  mills  under  the  present  law),  in  any  sub-district. 
The  highest  rate  named  in  the  case  under  consideration  is  Jour 
mills,  being  one  mill  less  than  the  maximum  fixed  by  law. 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  considerations,  I  cannot  do  otherwise 
than  affirm  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent. 

AFFIRMED. 

^  THOMAS  H.  BENTON",  JE., 
Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 

August  2,  1862. 


JACOB  KAUFFMAN,  Appellant,  v.  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  FAIRFIELD. 

Appeal   from  Fayette  County. 

SuB-DiSTBicT.  A  Sub-district  is  not  entitled  to  draw  money  from  district 
treasury  in  lieu  of  the  full  term  of  school  required  by  law. 

It  appears  from  the  record  of  proceedings  and  testimony  sent  up, 
that  the  district  board  authorized  said  sub-district  to  have  and  main- 
tain a  four  months  term  of  school  in  the  year  1859,  but  that  the  term 
actually  held  under  this  authority  continued  but  three,  months.  That 
application  was  made  by  eaid  Rib-district  in  the  next  succeeding 
year  to  have  the  term  for  the  year  last  named  which  said  sub-dis- 
trict was  authorized  to  hold,  extended  one  month,  or  the  sum  of 
twelve  dollars  in  lieu  thereof — this  sum  having  been  allowed  to  an- 
other sub-district  in  the  same  township,  which  had  failed  to  hold  its 
full  term  by  one  month.  Upon  this  application,  the  district  board 
either  never  acted,  or  acted  adversely  to  the  application.  The  min- 
utes of  the  board  are  silent  upon  the  question.  There  is  some 
evidence  however  tending  to  show  that  there  was  a  vote  taken 
which  resulted  in  denying  the  application. 

Upon  these  facts  the  county  superintendent  dtcided  that  said 
application  was  properly  denied,  and  in  this  opinion  I  unhesita- 
tingly concur.  AFFIRMED- 

H.  A.  WILTSE, 
Acting  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 

November  4th, 


SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


George  A.  Mcllenry  v.  The  District  Township  of  Kock  Grove. 


WADE,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  PAL 
MYRA. 

Appeal    from   Warren  County. 

BOATCD  OP  DIRECTORS.  The  acts  of  a  board  are  presumed  to  be  regular, 
legal,  and  just,  and  should  be  affirmed  by  ihe  Co.  superintendent,  upon  appeal, 
unless  proof  is  brought  to  show  the  contrary.  « 

.The  grievance  complained  of  in  this  case  is  the  alleged  improper 
location  of  the  school-house  in  and  for  sub-district  number  Two  in 
said  township.  There  is  no  testimony  sent  up — the  county  super- 
intendent in  his  turn  alleging  that  no  testimony  was  preservr d  by 
him,  and  that  it  is  out  of  his  power  to  reproduce  or  obtain  it.  "Under 
these  facts  there  is  nothing  to  rebr.t  the  presumption  of  law  in  favor 
of  the  regularity  and  correctness  of  the  proceedings  of  the  district 
board. 

Nothing  therefore  can  be  done  by  me,  but  to  affirm  the  decision  of 
the  county  superinteLident,  which  is  accordingly  done. 

AFFIRMED. 
H.  A.  WILTSE, 

Acting  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 
November  4, 1862. 


GEORGE  A.  McllENRY,  Appellant,  v.   THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 

KOCK    GROVE. 

Appeal  from  Floyd  County. 

B^ABD  OP  DIRECTOR*.  The  board  should  be  sustained  upon  appeal,  unless 
they  have  violated  law,  abused  their  discretionary  power,  or  have  acted  with 
manifest  injustice. 

As  nearly  as  can  be  ascertained  from  the  return  of  the  county 
superintendent  the  case  is  this:  Out  of  sub-district  number  Three  of 
said  township,  the  district  board  erected  sub-districts  number  Three 
and  Six.  In  sub-district  number  Six  so  created,  a  school  was  taught 
for  six  months  with  an  average  attendance  of  four  pupils.  At  the 
close  of  this  term  the  district  board  abandoned  said  sub-district  num- 
ber Six,  thus  making  sub-district  number  Three  to  embrace  the  same 
territory  that  it  did  contain  before  it  was  divided. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Ezra  Bradford  and  Thomas  A.  King  v.  The  District  Township  of  Lime  Creek. 

The  district  board  further  made  an  appropriation  of  money  to  de- 
fray the  expense  of  boarding  the  children  of  the  appellant  during  the 
term  of  the  school  in  said  sub-district  number  Three,  he  being  the 
only  one,  as  the  record  shows,  whose  family  was  seriously  incom- 
moded by  said  abandonment. 

Upon  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent  the  action  of  the  dis- 
trict board  was  affirmed ;  whereupon  an  appeal  from  his  decision 
has  brought  the  case  before  me. 

The  case  is  not  free  from  difficulty;  but  the  weight  of  evidence 
and  reason  seems  to  be  with  the  decision  of  the  county  superin- 
tendent. It  does  not  appear  what  amount  of  means  was  at  the  dis- 
posal of  the  board  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  a  school  in  sub- 
district  number  Three,  either  before  or  after  it  was  divided ;  nor 
does  it  appear  what  was  the  average  attendance  at  school  in  that 
sub-district  before  the  division.  Bat  it  is  fair  to  conclude  that 
neither  the  means  nor  attendance  was  larger  than  was  required  and 
proper  for  a  single  school.  If  this  is  true,  we  have  no  hesitancy  in 
saying  that  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  was  just. 

The  desire  of  the  appellant  to  provide  a  school  for  his  children  is 
honorable  to  both  his  head  and  heart;  but  the  provisions  made  by 
the  board  for  his  children  evinces  the  very  opposite  of  any  disposi- 
tion to  wrong  him  or  to  neglect  them. 

Had  the  appellant  shown  either  that  the  means  for  the  two 
schools  were  at  the  command  of  the  board,  or  that  the  average  at- 
tendance justified  another  school,  my  decision  would  have  gladly 
been  with  him;  but  in  the  absence  of  such  showing,  and  under  the 
facts  as  the  transcript  shows  them  to  exist,  I  must  and  do  affirm  the 
ruling  of  the  county  superintendent.  AFFIRMED. 

H.  A.  WILTSE, 

Acting  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 
November  ±  1862. 


EZRA  BRADFORD  and  THOMAS  A.  KING,  Appellants,  v.  THE  DIS- 
TRICT TOWNSHIP  OF  LIME  CREEK. 

Appeal  from  Washington  County. 

BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS.  The  acts  of  a  board  are  presumed  to  be  regular,  legal, 
and  just,  and  should  be  affirmed  by  the  county  superintendent,  upon  appeal, 
unless  proof  is  brought  to  show  the  contrary. 

It  appears  that  the  said  district  board,  on  the  7th  day  of  April, 
1860,  changed  the  boundaries  of  sub-district  number  Two.  The 


SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Independent  District  of  Manchester  v.  District  Township  of  Delaware. 


complaint  is  that  proper  notice  of  this  change  was  not  given,  and 
that  appellants  are  incommoded  .by  the  change. 

The  notice  conforms  precisely  to  the  requirement  of  sub-division 
12  of  section  16,  of  the  act  of  the  state  board  of  education,  passed 
December  24th,  1859,  and  in  force  when  said  change  was  made. 
If  appellants  wore  incommoded  by  the  change,  they  have  neglected 
to  show  how  or  when,  by  anything  approaching  to  testimony.  The 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  therefore 

AFFIRMED. 
H.  A.  WILTSE, 

Arting  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 
November  4th,  1862. 


INDEPENDENT  DISTRICT  OF  MANCHESTER  v.  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 

DELAWARE. 

Appeal  from  Delaware  County. 

SETTLEMENT.  After  an  independent  district  has  been  erected  within  a  town- 
ship district,  and  the  respective  boards  of  directors  have  paid  the  debts  owing  by 
the  district  prior  to  the  separation,  and  divided  the  funds  on  hand,  a  new  board 
of  one  of  these  organizations  cannot  appeal. 

The  district  of  Manchester  was  for  some  time  included  in  and 
was  a  sub-district  of  the  said  district  township  of  Delaware. 
While  so  included,  schools  were  taught,  taxes  levied  and  collected, 
debts  incurred  and  funds  acquired.  When  Manchester  separated 
from  Delaware  district,  there  were  both  assets  and  liabilities  to  be 
divided  and  paid.  The  plan  adopted  in  reference  to  said  assets 
and  debts  was,  that  each  organization  should  pay  and  receive 
thereof  an  amount  proportioned  to  the  taxable  property  within  each. 
This  play  was  carried  into  effect  and  the  debts  paid  and  the  assets 
divided  accordingly.  Some  time  after  this  agreement  had  been 
made  and  carried  into  full  effect  without  objection  or  complaint  by 
either  party,  the  district  of  Manchester  claimed  before  the  county 
superintendent  of  Delaware  county  that  the  assets,  which  consisted 
of  money,  should  have  been  divided  in  proportion  to  the  number 
of  children  between  the  ages  of  five  and  twenty-one  years.  This 
claim  was  entertained  by  the  county  superintendent,  a  trial  was  had 
and  the  claim  sustained. 

We  cannot  see  how  the  county  superintendent  acquired  juris- 
diction of  this  case.  "  Any  person  aggrieved,"  etc.,  says  the  law, 


SCHOOL  LVW  DECISIONS. 


J.  H.  Mason  v.  The  District  Township  of  Otter  Creek. 


"  may  appeal."  Eat  in  this  case  there  was  no  person  aggrieved. 
Two  parties  equally  competent  to  contract,  make  and  fully  execu'e 
a  contract.  One  of  the  parties,  it  appear^,  has  since  become  dis- 
satisfied with  the  contract.  But  it  is  "one  of  the  contracting  parties 
that  so  becomes  dissatisfied,  and  there  is  no  tribunal  that  can 
listen  to  the  complaint  or  grant  relief.  The  law  was  made  for 
parties  who  had  no  voice  in  the  decision;  not  certainly  for  parties 
who  come  complaining  of  their  own  decisions. 

We  therefore  feel  compelled  to,  and  do  reverse  the  decision  of  the 
county  superintendent. 

REVERSED. 

II.  A.  WILTSE, 

Acting  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 
November  o,  1862. 


J.  H.   MASON,  Appellant,  v.    THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  OTTER 

CREEK. 

Appeal  from  Linn  County. 

1.  APPEAL.     An  appeal  may  be  taken  at  any  tirn.3  within  thirty  clays  from 
the  rendition  of  tli3  order  complained  of. 

2.  MOTION.     When  a  motion  to  dismiss  is  overruled,   the  superintendent 
should  proceed  to  try  the  case  upon  its  merits. 

In  the  spring  of  1861.  action  was  taken  by  the  board  of  directors 
of  said  district  township  which  resulted  in  the  selection  of  a  site 
for  a  school  house  in  sub  district  number  Five  of  said  district  town  • 
ship. 

In  the  spring  of  1862,  the  said  board  were  petitioned  for  a  reloca- 
tion of  said  site,  which  petition  was  denied ;  and  from  this  denial 
one  of  the  petitioners,  Mr.  A.  Hagerrnan,  appealed  to  the  county 
superintendent. 

At  the  hearing  of  the  case  by  the  county  superintendent,  the 
appellant  in  the  case  before  me  moved  to  dismiss  the  case  because 
the  appeal  had  not  been  taken  within  the  limit  of  time  fixed  by  the 
statute.  How  Mr.  Mason  became  a  party  to  the  case  between  said 
Hagerman  and  said  district  nowhere  appears.  His  motion  to 
dismiss,  however,  was  based  upon  the  idea  that  the  action  of  said 
board  in  denying  the  re-location  prayed  for,  could  not  be  appealed 


SCHOOL   L1W  DECISIONS. 


O.  Deremo  v.  District  Township  of  Center. 


from;  and  that  the  appeal  was  in  fact  from  the  decision  of  the 
board  ordering  the  location  in  the  first  instance. 

Upon  this  motion,  the  county  superintendent  held: 

1st.  That  an  appeal  to  be  valid  must  be  taken  within  thirty 
days;  and 

2d.  That  the  appeal  before  him,  being  from  the  action  of  the 
board  denying  the  prayer  for  a  re-location,  had  been  taken  in  due 
time. 

From  this  decision,  Mr.  Mason,  a  stranger  to  the  case,  so  far  as 
the  record  shows,  appeals  to  me. 

The  motion  to  dismiss  was  properly  overruled,  and  the  action  of 
the  county  superintendent  in  that  behalf  must  be,  and  is  hereby 
affirmed.  The  appeal  was  manifestly  from  the  last  action  of  the 
board — that  had  in  in  1862,  and  was  taken  in  due  time. 

Why  the  proceedings  before  the  county  superintendent  should 
have  cease  upon  the  overruling  of  the  motion,  is  as  much  a  mys- 
tery, from  all  the  record  discloses,  as  how  Mr.  Mason  came  to  be 
a  party  to  the  case.  After  overruling  the  motion,  the  superintend- 
ent should  have  gone  on  and  heard  the  testimony  and  decided 
whether  or  not  the  action  of  the  board  denying  the  relocation  was 
correct.  If  correct,  he  should  have  affirmed  it;  and  if  otherwise, 
he  should  have  reversed  it.  And  this,  after  giving  the  parties  due 
notice,  he  should  still  do.  AFFIRMED. 

II.  A.  WILTSE, 

Acting  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 
November  5,  1862. 


O.  DKREMJ  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  CENTER. 
Appeal  fro?n  Allamakee  County. 

1.  LIABILITY  OP  DISTRICT  BOARD  :  Where  a  board  of  directors  refuses 
to  draw  an  order  on  the  treasurer  for  the  amount  of  a  judgment  obtained 
against  the  district,  and  therefore  a  judgment  is  obtained  against  the  individuals 
c  >mposiug  the  bond,  the  claim  against  the  district  has  expired,  and  the  board 
his  then  no  power  to  draw  such  order. 

2.  A  board  of  directors  has  no  power  to  levy  a  tax  for  the  benefit  of  the 
school-house  fund,  unless  au  horized  so  to  do  by  a  vote  of  the  electors. 

The  district  was  indebted  to  John  Stillman  for  building  a  school 
house  in  sub-district  number  Four,  of  said  township.  Failing  in 


SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


O.  Deremo  v.  District  Township  of  Center. 


payment,  Stillman  brought  suit  in  the  district  court  of  said  county, 
and  obtained  judgment  for  the  amount  of  his  claim.  At  a  subse- 
quent regular  meeting  of  the  electors  of  said  district  the  subject  of 
this  judgment  was  called  up,  and  the  electors  refused  to  make  any 
provision  for  the  payment  thereof.  Thereupon  Stillman  brought 
suit  against  the  officers  of  said  district  township  by  virtue  of  section 
3276,  page  602,  of  Revision  of  I860,  and  recovered  a  judgment 
against  them  in  their  individual  capacity.  No  date  is  given  in  the 
record  to  any  of  the  occurrences  above  named.  On  the  6th  of  June, 
1862,  an  order  on  the  school-house  fund  was  drawn  by  said  board  in 
favor  of  said  Stillman,  and  delivered  to,  and  received  by  him  for 
the  amount  of  the  last  named  judgment  and  costs.  From  the  action 
of  the  board  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superintendent  of 
said  county.  On  the  30th  of  June,  1862,  the  said  board  levied  a 
tax  on  the  taxable  property  of  the  district  for  the  purpose  of  provi- 
ding the  means  for  the  payment  of  said  order;  and  from  this  action 
of  the  board  an  appeal  was  likewise  taken  to  the  superintendent. 
The  trial  before  the  superintendent  resulted  in  his  sustaining  the 
action  of  the  board  on  the  6th  of  June,  and  reversing  that  had  on  the 
30th  of  June.  From  the  first  named  branch  of  his  decision,  the 
said  Deremo  appealed,  and  from  the  last  branch  said  board  has  ap- 
pealed to  me.  The  refusal  of  the  board  to  issue  an  order  had  ren- 
dered the  individuals  composing  the  board,  amenable  to  a  judgment 
at  the  suit  of  Still  in  an.  The  fact  that  the  board  refused  a  demand 
made  upon  it  to  draw  an  order  for  the  amount  of  the  first  judgment, 
and  that  it  was,  at  the  time  it  so  refused,  in  its  power  to  have  done 
so,  must  have  been  proved  in  court  as  the  basis  of  the  second  judg- 
ment. The  electors,  it  is  true,  refused  to  authorize  the  board  to  levy 
a  tax  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  first  judgment.  But  this  action 
of  the  electors  did  not  stand  in  the  way  of  the  board  drawing  the 
order,  and  thus  complying  with  the  positive  requirements  of  section 
3275,  page  601,  of  the  Revision  of  1860.  By  this  refusal,  the  judg- 
ment-creditor is  put  the  trouble  and  expense  of  a  fresh  suit,  and  the 
demand  is  largely  increased. 

The  judgment  against  the  district  expired  with  the  rendition  of 
the  judgment  against  the  individual  members  of  the  board.  Still- 
man  had  no  longer  a  claim  against  the  district.  The  board  has  not 
and  should  never  have  power  to  draw  an  order  upon  its  treasurer 
for  any  other  purpose  than  the  one  of  paying  an  indebtedness  of  the 
district.  I  can  see  no  difference  in  principle  between  this  case  and 
one  where  the  board  should  issue  an  order  to  pay  the  private  debt 
of  any  one  or  all  the  members  of  the  board.  The  judgment  was 
neither  against  the  board  nor  the  district,  but  against  certain  indi- 
viduals. These  individuals  should  pay  the  judgment;  and  then 

s2 


10  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Solonio  :  Sharp  v.  District  Township  of  Walnut. 

seek  relief,  so  far  as  they  are  entitled  to  any,  from  the  district,  or  at 
the  hands  of  the  electors  when  assembled  pursuant  to  law.  They 
should  not  be  permitted  to  sit  as  judges  in  their  own  case.  For 
these  reasons  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  sustaining 
the  action  of  the  board  in  issuing  said  order,  is  reversed. 

That  part  of  the  decision  which  reversed  the  action  of  the  board 
in  levying  a  tax  to  pay  said  order,  was  undoubtedly  right.  The 
board  had  no  authority  of  law  upon  which  to  base  its  action.  First, 
Mr.  Stillman's  order  was  not  issued  to  pay  any  debt  against  the 
district;  and,  second,  if  it  had  been,  it  was,  or  should  have  been, 
an  order  on  the  school-house  fund,  and  for  the  benefit  of  this  fund, 
the  board  is  only  at  liberty  by  law  to  make  a  levy,  when  the  elec- 
tors have,  by  vote  authorized  it  to  do  so.  This  part  of  the  county 
superintendent's  decision  is,  therefore,  affirmed. 

AFFIRMED. 

II.  A.  WILTSE, 

Acting  Secretary  Board  of  Education. 
November  5, 1862. 


SOLOMON  SHARP  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  WALNUT,  Appellanf. 
Appeal  from    Wayne  County. 

SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES.  A  sub-district  which,  prior  to  the  passage  of  the 
act  of  12th  March,  1858,  was  composed  of  parts  of  two  or  more  civil  townships, 
cannot  be  dissolved  by  the  action  of  but  one  of  the  boards  of  diiectors  interested. 

At  the  time  the  act  of  12th  March,  185S,  took  effect,  there  existed 
in  said  county  a  school-district  organized  in  pursuance  of  the  law 
before  that  time  in  force,  composed  of  territory  lying  partly  in  Jack- 
son township  and  partly  in  Walnut  township.  This  district  con- 
tained a  school-house  in  actual  use,  situate  in  that  part  of  the  dis- 
trict lying  in  Walnut  township.  After  the  passage  of  said  act  this 
district  became  sub-district  number  Two  of  Walnut  township. 

In  September,  1862,  the  district  board  of  Walnut  divided  their 
township  into  sub-districts,  and  in  this  division  disregarded  the  dis- 
trict first  above  named— attaching  so  much  thereof  as  lay  in  Walnut 
township,  part  to  one  and  part  to  another  sub-district. 

From  this  action  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superintend- 
ent, who  reversed  the  same;  and  his  decision  is  the  matter  com- 
plained of  in  the  appeal  to  me. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISION?. 


Selomon  Sharp  v.  D!sirict  Township  of  Walnut. 


The  law  provides  two  contingencies,  upon  the  happening  of  either 
of  which  a  district  of  this  character  shall  cease  ;  and  it  further  pro- 
vides two  modes  for  abrogating  the  district:  by  petition,  and  by 
concurrent  action  of  the  two  boards.  Neither  of  these  contingencies 
has  happened,  and  no  petition  was  presented.  Hence  the  only 
question  is  whether  the  board  of  Jackson  township  concurred. 

To  establish  the  fact  of  this  concurrence,  the  appellant  relies  upon 
a  certificate  by  the  secretary  of  the  board  last  namod,  of  which  the 
following  is  a  copy: 

"  This  is  to  certify  that  nt  a  meeting  of  the  directors  of  school 
district  township  of  Jackson  in  Wayne  county,  Iowa,  held  at  the 
house  of  James  Campbell  on  September  the  15th,  1862,  the 
directors  ordered  the  township  of  Jackson  to  be  divided  into  three 
sub-districts. 

JAMES  CAMPBELL, 
Secretary  of  the  Board" 


This  certificate  was  objected  to  and  rejected  at  the  trial  below, 
because  it  was.  a  statement  by  Mr.  Campbell  as  to  what  the  board 
had  done.  Because,  to  be  evidence,  it  should  have  been  a  copy 
from  the  records  of  the  board,  certified  to  as  such  by  the  secretary. 
This  objection  was  well  taken  and  the  ruling  upon  it  was  correct. 

Were  the  certificate  legal  evidence,  it  does  not  show  concurrence. 
It  simply  asserts  that  the  directors  of  Jackson  township  ordered  the 
township  divided  into  three  sub-districts.  This  might  have  been 
both  ordered  and  executed  without  interfering  with  or  in  any  way 
disturbing  the  district  first  above  named,  if  it  was  in  fact  the  in- 
tention of  the  board  of  Jackson  township  to  concur  in  abrogating 
the  district  first  above  named  and  to  absorb  so  much  of  the  territory 
thereof  as  lay  in  Jackson  township,  such  intention  is  not  shown. 

This  certificate  is  all  [the  testimony  contained  by  the  record  as 
even  tending  to  show  concurrence  on  the  part  of  the  district  board 
of  Jackson  township,  and  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  people  resid- 
ing in  Jackson  township  and  within  the  limits  of  the  district  first 
above  named  desire  any  change  whatever. 

We  pass  over  the  paper  purporting  to  show  concurrence  by  the 
district  board  of  Monroe  township,  because  it  has  nothing  to  do  with, 
and  has  no  hearing  whatever  upon  the  case. 

It  was  claimed  before  the  county  superintendent,  that  the  district 
first  above-named  was  a  permanent  district,  not  subject  to  be 
changed,  except  done  in  accordance  with  the  act  approved  24th  Jan- 
uary, 1863,  chapter  101,  page  157,  of  the  acts  of  our  fourth  general 
assembly.  This  is  a  mistake.  It  is  subject  to  be  changed  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  laws  now  in  force. 


}2  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


District  Township  of  Washington  v.  District  Township  of  Masalem. 

Section  78,  of  the  laws  of  the  ninth  general  assembly,  page  219, 
governs  this  case.  The  old  district  existed  prior  to  the  taking  effect 
of  the  act  of  the  12th  Mirch,  1858,  and  possessed  a  school-house 
which  had  not  been  destroyed,  removed  nor  abandoned. 

Under  these  facts  the  old  district,  with  the  boundaries  as  they  ex- 
isted at  the  time  the  act  of  12th  March,  1858,  took  effect,  must  re- 
main a  sub-district  of  Walnut  township(in  which  the  school-house  is 
situated),  until  changed  in  pursuance  of  law. 

AFFIRMED. 
H.  A.  WILTSE, 

Acting  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 
December  20th,  1862. 


DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  WASHINGTON  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT 
TOWNSHIP  OF  MOSALEM. 

Appeal  from  Dubuque  County. 

PROCEEDINGS:  Regularity  of  presumed.  When  the  district  township  records 
show,  that  fora  number  of  consecutive  years,  the  children  of  certain  congres- 
sional divisions  of  land,  have  been  enumerated,  and  have  attended  school  in  a 
certain  district  township,  and  no  objections  have  been  raised,  it  will  be  presumed 
that  the  territory  is  regularly  attached  to,  and  forms  a  part  of,  said  district  town- 
ship. 

The  appellant,  in  his  capacity  of  president  of  Washington  town- 
ship in  Dubuque  county,  Iowa,  claims  in  this  case  that  Washington 
township  is  entitled  to  certain  school  moneys  which  have  been  or 
are  about  to  be  paid  over  to  Mosalem  township  in  said  county. 
He  alleges  that  sub-district  number  Seven  of  Washington  township 
embraces  parts  of  Mosalem,  Washington,  and  Table  Mound  town- 
ships in  said  county,  and  that  the  school-house  for  this  district  is  in 
Washington  township;  that  this  district  was  organized  as  far  back 
as  1849,  and  has  ever  since  been  organized  and  existing  district  and 
that  it  is  now  a  sub-district  in  Washington  township  by  virtue  of 
section  78  of  the  present  school  law. 

The  existence  of  this  district,  or  rather  of  any  part  of  the  district 
within  Mosalem  township  at  the  time  the  act  of  March  12,  1858, 
took  effect  (the  criterion  by  which  appellant's  claim  is  to  be  judged), 
is  denied  by  appellee,  and  is  the  only  issue  in  the  case. 

The  claim  for  the  moneys  in  question  was  rejected  by  the  district 
township  of  Mosalem,  and  this  action  was  sustained  by  the  county 
superintendent  of  Dubuque  county,  on  the  ground  that  the  evidence 


SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


District  Township  of  Washington  v.  District  Township  of  Masalem. 

produced  upon  the  trial  before  him  did  not  show  the  time  and  man- 
ner of  the  organization  of  said  district  number  Seven.  He  con- 
cluded that  unless  the  original  organization  was  shown  to  have  been 
legal,  the  plaintiff's  case  must  fail.  The  facts  not  having,  in  his 
judgment,  been  established  by  competent  testimony,  he  found  for  the 
defendant. 

That  the  superintendent  was  mistaken  in  the  view  he  took  of 
the  law,  is  mobt  obvious.  Under  the  issue  made,  the  only  ques- 
tion for  him  to  have  investigated,  was  whether  at  the  time  the  act 
of  12th  of  .March,  18:8,  took  effect,  the  district  in  question  existed 
and  had  a  school-house  which  had  not  been  destroyed,  removed  or 
abandoned.  jSTor  was  record  evidence  (as  assumed  by  the  superin- 
tendent) the  only  testimony  receivable  to  establish  this  fact. 

The  superintendent  made  up  his  transcript  prior  to  the  distribution 
of  our  pamphlet  upon  appeals.  This  accounts  for  and  perhaps  ex- 
cuses him  for  sending  up,  in  place  of  the  testimony,  simply  a  com- 
mentary upon  the  oral  testimony  produced  before  him.  Enough  is 
sent  up,  however,  to  show  that  this  district,  embracing  the  halt' 
section  of  Mosalem  tovnship  claimed  to  be  a  part  thereof,  existed 
long  prior  to  and  at  the  time  of  the  taking  effect  of  the  act  of  12th 
of  March,  1858,  and  that  it  had  a  school-house  in  actual  use. 

The  record  of  said  district  number  Seven — dating  back  to  1849— 
shows  that  gentlemen  who  were  admitted  in  the  argument  before 
me  to  have  been  at  the  time  residents  upon  said  half  section,  were 
in  the  .years  1849, 1851,  1853,  1855,  and  1857,  members  of  the  board 
of  directors  of  said  district  number  seven. 

This  record  further  shows  that  for  the  years  1860  and  1861,  the 
children  of  residents  upon  this  half  section  were  enumerated  as 
being  included  within  said  district. 

This  record  further  shows  that  there  has  been  a  school  taught  in 
said  district,  at  which  the  children  of  residents  upon  said  half  section 
have  been  taught,  ever  since  the  year  1849. 

It  appears  by  the  record  of  the  county  superintendent  of  Dubuque 
county,  Iowa,  (which  with  the  record  above  referred  to  were  in 
evidence  before  the  county  superintendent  and  came  up  with  the 
case)  that,  in  the  year  1860,  when  the  boundaries  of  this  and  many 
other  sub-districts  were  by  superintendent  Mason  for  the  first  time 
recorded,  this  half  section  formed,  and  had  before  that  time  formed, 
a  part  of  the  district  in  question. 

The  county  superintendent,  in  his  transcript  in  this  case,  names 
four  witnesses,  the  effect  of  whose  testimony  as  found  and  reported 
by  him,  was  that  said  district  number  Seven  was  composed  in  part 
of  said  half  section  in  Mosalem  township  more  than  ten  years  ago, 
and  had  always,  up  to  1860,  received  the  money  arising  from  school 


14  SCHOOL   LA.W  DECISIONS. 


J.  D.  Brand  v.  The  District  Township  of  Morgan. 


taxes  levied  upon  this  half  section.      And  this  testimony   stands 
uncontradicted. 

From  all  this  testimony,  and  which  is  unopposed  by  anything 
brought  forward  by  defendant,  we  can  but  conclude,  and  do  most 
unhesitatingly  pronounce,  the  south  half  ot  section  thirty-one,  in 
township  eighty-eight  of  range  three,  east  of  the  fifth  principal 
meridian,  in  the  township  of  Mosalem,  in  the  county  of  Dubuque 
and  state  of  Iowa,  formed  a  part  of  sub-district  numbered  Seven, 
in  Washington  township,  in  eaid  county,  at  the  time  the  act  of  12th 
March,  1858,  took  effect;  and  that  it  is  still  a  parr  of  said  district 
and  entitled  to  the  school  moneys  claimed  in  this  suit.  I  am 
therefore  compelled  to  reverse,  and  do  hereby  reverse  the  finding 
and  decision  in  this  case  of  the  county  superintendent  of  Dubuque 
county. 

REVERSED. 

H.  A.  WILTSE, 

Acting  Secretary  of  Board  of  Education. 


J.  D.  BRAND  v.   THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  or  MORGAN,  Appellant 
Appeal  from  Franklin  County. 

SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES:  Change  of.  Sub-district  boundaries  may  be 
changed,  only  at  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  in  September,  or 
at  a  special  meeting  called  thereafter  for  that  purpose,  before  the  following  sub- 
district  election. 

It  appears  from  the  transcript  of  the  county  superintendent,  that 
on  the  loth  day  of  September,  1862,  the  board  of  directors  of  the 
district  township  of  Morgan,  in  said  county,  formed  a  new  sub- 
district—number  Four— out  of  portions  of  sub-districts  numbers 
Two  and  Three.  And  that  on  the  first  Monday  in  March,  1863,  the 
electors  in  said  sub-district  number  Four,  elected  a  sub-director; 
and  that  on  the  second  Monday  in  March,  1863,  the  electors  in  said 
township  voted  a  tax  of  five  hundred  dollars  for  the  purpose  of 
building  a  school-house  in  said  sub-district  number  Four.  But 
that  on  the  28th  day  of  March,  1863,  the  board  of  directors  of  said 
district  township  dissolved  said  sub-district  number  Four,  ard 
consolidated  it  with  sub-districts  numbers  Two  and  Three.  From 
this  last  act  of  the  board  of  directors  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the 
county  superintendent,  who  reversed  the  order  of  the  board;  and 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  15 


David  Burch  and  Elizabeth  Bnrch  v.  the  District  Township  of  Hickory  Grove. 

from  this  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  an  appeal  is  brought 
as  above. 

It  seems  from  an  examination  of  the  case  that  the  only  question 
submitted  to  the  superintendent,  was  that  of  jurisdiction,  to- wit: 
whether  the  board  of  directors  had  authority  to  change  the 
boundaries  of  sub-districts  at  the  time  stated,  viz. :  on  the  28th  day 
of  March. 

I  consider  this  question  settled  by  the  commentary  of  Col.  Thos. 
H.  Ben  ton,  jr.,  ou  section  29  of  the  present  school  law;  hence  I 
need  not  review  the  points  presented  by  the  appellee.  Were  it  an 
open  question  I  think  an  examination  of  said  section  would  bring 
me  to  the  same  conclusion  as  that  reached  by  Col.  Benton.  Hence 
I  have  no  hesitation  in  confirming,  and  do  hereby  confirm  the 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent. 

AFFIRMED. 
ORAN  FAVILLE, 
Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 

August,  1863. 


DAVID  BURCH  and  ELIZABETH  BURGH  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP 
OF  HICKORY  GROVE,  Appellant. 

Appeal  from  Scott  County. 

SuB-DiKECTORS,  in  contracting  with  a  teacher,  rnust  be  governed  by  instruc- 
tions ot  the  board  of  directors. 

The  record  of  the  county  superintendent  shows  that  the  old  sub- 
director  for  sub-district  number  Tw©  of  said  district  township,  on 
the  13th  day  of  April,  1S63,  made  a  contract  with  Mrs.  E.  Burch  to 
teach  the  summer  school  for  three  months,  commencing  on  the  first 
Monday  in  May,  1863;  that  this  contract  was  given  to  the  president 
of  the  board  of  directors  at  a  meeting  of  said  board,  on  the  day  first 
above  named,  to  be  approved  and  filed;  but  that  the  contract  was 
not  appro vf  d,  for  reasons  set  forth  in  the  transcript  of  the  secretary's 
record,  to-wit:  that  "the  sub-director  had  not  been  instructed  to 
make  contracts  for  the  summer  schools,  and  that  (according  to  cus- 
tom) no  resolution  had  been  passed  limiting  the  time  of  the  schools 
and  the  wages  of  teachers."  That  after  the  organization  of  the  new 
board  of  directors,  the  new  sub-director  for  said  sub-district,  under 
direction  of  the  board,  employed  another  teacher,  who  commenced 


SCHOOL   LAW   DECISIONS. 


J.  T.  Crane  v.  District  Township  or  Montrose. 


teaching;  that  from  this  act  of  the  board  Mr.  Bnrch  appealed  to  the 
county  superintendent,  who  declared  the  contract  with  Mrs.  Burch 
legal  and  binding. 

Davison  dk  True  for  appellant. 
ISTo  appearance  for  appellee. 

The  decision  of  the  superintendent  is  based  on  the  supposition 
that  the  old  sub-director  has  full  power  to  act  until  the  new  board 
is  organized,  and  that  the  contract  was  made  in  good  faith,  and  was 
regular  in  all  respects,  except  in  not  having  the  signature  of  the 
president  of  the  board.  It  is  true  that  the  old  sub-director  has 
authority  to  act  until  the  new  board  is  organized,  but  he  must  act 
under  instriiciion  from  the  board. 

Section  48,  part  33  of  the  law  says:  "It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
sub-director,  under  such  rules  and  restrictions  as  the  board  may  pre- 
scribe, to  negotiate  and  make  in  his  sub-district  all  necessary  con- 
tracts for  providing  fuel  for  schools,  employing  teachers,"  etc. 
"All  contracts  made  in  conformity  with  the  provisions  of  this  sec- 
tion, shall  be  approved  by  the  president  and  reported  to  the  board 
of  directors,"  etc.  It  is  not  claimed  that  the  board  had  directly  in- 
structed him  to  employ  a  teacher  for  the  summer  school;  and  as- 
suming that  he  acted  under  general  instructions,  the  contract  would 
not  be  binding  unless  approved  by  the  president  of  the  board. 

Under  the  circumstances  we  feel  compelled  to  and  do  reverse  the 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent. 

REVERSED. 
OR  AN  FAYILLE, 
Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education. 

July  29,  1863. 


J.  T.  CRANE  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  M»>NTR-SE. 
Appeal  from  Lee  County. 

APPEAL.     An  appeal  may  be  taken  from  an  order  of  the  board  which  is  in  ef- 
fect the  affirmance  of  a  former  action. 

The  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of  Montrose  in 
Lee  county,  on  the  15th  of  September,  1S62,  changed  the  boundaries 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  17 


J.  T.  Crane  v.  District  Township  of  Montrose. 

of  sub-districts  numbers  Six  and  Seven,  transferring  the  plain- 
tiff from  the  latter  to  the  former.  A  special  meeting  of  the  board 
was  held,  at  the  request  of  the  plaintiff,  on  the  7th  of  February, 
1863,  for  the  purpose  of  "  regulating  the  boundaries  of  sub-dis- 
tricts numbers  Six  and  Seven,  and  for  other  purposes  " ;  and  it  was 
decided  at  said  meeting  u  to  make  no  change."  From  this  order  of 
the  board,  the  plaintiff  on  the  16th  of  February,  1863,  appealed  to 
the  county  superintendent,  who  heard  the  evidence  and  arguments 
on  the  7th  of  March,  1863,  and  on  the  14th  of  March  gave  his  de- 
cision reversing  the  action  of  the  board  in  the  premises  and  reinstat- 
ing the  plaintiff  in  sub-district  number  Seven.  From  this  decision 
of  the  county  superintendent  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  secretary  of 
the  board  of  education. 

JFrank  Balling er  for  appellant. 
J.  H.  Craig  for  appellee. 

The  counsel  for  appellant  claims  that  the  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent  should  be  reversed  for  the  following  reasons: 

1.  The  plaintiff  was  debarred  the  right  of  appeal  by  the  statute 
of  limitation. 

2.  His  affidavit  was  insufficient  in  not  specifying  wherein  he 
was  aggrieved. 

3.  The  board  of  directors  acts  as  a  local  legislature  in  fixing  the 
boundaries  of  sub-districts,  and  its  acts  in  this  regard  are  not  subject 
to  review  by  the  county  superintendent. 

4.  The  merits  of  the  case  require  that  the  action  of  the  board 
should  be  sustained. 

The  question  of  jurisdiction  having  been  waived  by  the  appellant, 
on  the  trial  before  the  county  superintendent,  the  case  might  be  de- 
termined on  its  merits  alone,  and  the  discussion  of  other  points 
would  be  mere  obiter  dicta,  were  it  not  that  having  examined  all 
the  testimony  and  arguments,  covering  over  one  hundred  pages  of 
manuscript,  and  that  other  similar  causes  may  arise,  we  think  the 
questions  raised  should  be  settled. 

The  counsel  on  both  sides  have  given  the  subject  thorough  inves- 
tigation and  have  cited  authorities  to  sustain  their  positions.  We 
briefly  notice  the  positions  taken  by  the  counsel  for  appellant. 

1.  It  is  claimed  that  the  appeal  should  have  been  taken  from  the 
action  of  the  board  in  September,  1862;  and  as  the  board  refused 
to  take  any  action  at  its  meeting  in  February,  1863,  the  remedy  of 
the  plaintiff  was  mandamus  and  not  appeal. 

The  boundaries  of  sub-districts  may   be  changed  at  the  regular 

s3 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


J.  T.  Crane  v.  District  Township  or  Montrose. 


meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  on  the  third  Monday  in  Septem- 
ber, or  at  any  special  meeting  called  for  that  purpose,  any  time 
between  the  third  Monday  in  September  and  the  first  Monday  in 
March;  but  any  changes  made  in  said  boundaries  will  not  take  effect 
until  the  first  Monday  in  March;  consequently  no  one  will  acquire 
any  rights  or  suffer  any  injuries  during  this  period  in  consequence 
of  any  such  change.  The  subject  matter,  then,  is  an  open  question 
with  the  board  during  the  period  named. 

It  is  true  that  if,  after  the  third  Monday  in  September,  no  special 
meeting  is  held  by  the  board  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  the 
boundaries  of  sub-districts,  its  action  taken  at  that  time  will  stand, 
unless  appealed  from  within  thirty  days;  and  the  person  believing 
himself  aggrieved  by  said  action  may  elect  either  to  appeal  or  to 
secure  a  special  meeting  of  the  board  for  a  redress  of  his  griev- 
ances. 

This  method  of  procedure  has  heretofore  been  recognized  by  this 
department.  A  similar  case  was  brought  from  Fayette  county,  and 
the  decision  rendered  by  my  predecessor  was  published  in  The  Iowa 
Instructor  and  School  Journal,  July  1,  1863.  In  that  case  the 
board  of  directors  at  its  regular  meeting  in  September,  passed  a  res- 
olution changing  the  boundaries  of  certain  sub-districts;  and  at  a 
special  meeting  held  in  December  for  the  purpose  of  rescinding  said 
resolution,  it  refused  to  rescind  ;  but  voted  in  effect  to  re-affirm  its 
action  in  September. 

From  this  last  order  of  the  board  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the 
county  superintendent,  who  entertained  the  appeal  and  reversed  the 
action  of  the  board  in  the  premises. 

In  the  present  case  the  board  held  a  special  meeting  in  February, 
for  the  purpose  of  regulating  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts  num- 
bers Six  and  Seven  ;  in  other  words  to  rescind  its  action  relating 
thereto  at  its  meeting  in  September,  thus  re-opening  the  question 
de  novo;  and  its  refusal  to  reverse  its  former  action  was  equivalent 
to  re-affirming  its  previous  decision. 

2.  The  law  says,  "  the  affidavit  shall  set  forth  the  the  errors  com- 
plained of  in  a  plain  and  concise  manner."  It  must  be  sufficiently 
explicit  to  enable  the  county  superintendent  to  determine  from  what 
decision  of  the  board,  and  when  made,  the  plaintiff  appeals,  and 
what  are  the  grounds  of  complaint.  It  is  not  necesssry  that  the 
affidavit  shall  state  all  the  facts  that  are  expected  to  be  established 
by  the  testimony.  It  must  contain  sufficient  data  to  initiate  the 
appeal. 

The  affidavit  in  question,  besides  recounting  the  supposed  errors 
of  the  board  in  changing  the  boundaries  of  the  sub-districts,  states 
particularly  that  affiant's  children  had  been  dismissed  from  school 
without  cause. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


J.  T.  Crane  v.  District  Township  of  Montrose. 


The  county  superintendent  was  not  only  justified  in  entertaining 
the  appeal,  but  under  the  circumstances,  would  have  been  culpable 
in  dismissing  it;  for  affiant's  children  had  been  dismissed  from  the 
school  where  they  had  a  perfect  right  to  attend  until  the  first  Monday 
in  March,  even  if  the  action  of  the  board  in  changing  the  boundaries 
of  the  sub-districts  were  affirmed. 

3.  It  is  true  the  board  of  directors  acts  as  a  "  local  legislature  " 
in  regulating  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts,  but  it  does  not  follow 
that  it  may  not  commit  errors,  or  that  those  errors  cannot  be  cor- 
rected by  a  competent  tribunal.      The  decision  of  the  board  is  com- 
pared to  the  finding  of  a  jury  on  simple  matter  of  fact,  which  can- 
not be  reviewed  at  common  law.     But  if  the  verdict  be  perverse,  or 
if  any  of  the  jury  be  guilty  of  misconduct,  the  court  may  direct  a 
new  trial. 

The  law  of  appeal  makes  no  distinction  in  the  class  of  cases  that 
is  subject  to  review,  with  this  exception,  that  no  judgment  shall  be 
rendered  for  money.  The  object  of  the  law  would  in  a  great  meas- 
ure be  defeated  if  the  decision  of  the  board  affecting  the  boundaries 
of  sub-districts  were  not  subject  to  review,  for  there  are  few  ques- 
tions in  regard  to  which  men  are  more  sensitive  than  where  they 
shall  send  their  children  to  school  ;  and  it  would  seem  an  arbitrary 
abuse  of  authority  for  the  board  to  decide  that  A  shall  send  his 
children  and  pay  his  taxes  in  number  Six,  and  that  B  shall  send  his 
children  and  pay  his  taxes  in  number  Seven,  without  notice,  without 
hearing  and  without  remedy  ! 

4.  But  the  counsel  for  appellant  claims  that  if  his  first,  second, 
and  third  positions  are  not  sustained,  the  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent  should  be  reversed  on  the  ground  of  justice   and 
equity. 

It  is  claimed  that  the  plaintiff  was  removed  from  sub-district 
number  Seven,  to  number  Six,  mainly  for  two  reasons:  first,  be- 
cause objections  were  entertained  against  him  and  especially  against 
his  children  by  the  people  in  sub-district  number  Seven;  second, 
because  the  transfer  of  plaintiff  to  number  Six  would  enable  that 
sub-district  to  build  a  school-house  which  it  could  not  do  without 
such  transfer. 

The  testimony  does  not  establish  the  first  point.  It  nearly  all 
goes  to  show  that  the  plaintiff  is  "a  good  neighbor  and  that  his 
children  are  as  good  as  the  average." 

The  only  position  remaining  has  regard  to  equalizing  taxation  for 
the  purpose  of  building  school-houses.  Here  the  counsel  for  appel- 
lant makes  a  strong  point.  He  claims  that  sub-district  number 
Seven  is  wealthy  and  has  a  school-house  paid  for,  that  sub-district 
number  Six  is  smaller  and  has  not  sufficient  taxable  property  —  at 
the  maximum  levy  —  to  build  a  school-house  in  forty  years  ;  and 


20  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Jane  Brown  v.  The  District  Township  of  Rlchland. 

moreover  that  it  has  been  the  custom  for  each  sub-district  to  build 
its  own  school-house. 

The  records  show  that  prior  to  1861  the  plaintiff  was  attached  to 
sub-district  number  Six;  but  that,  on  application,  he  was  that  year 
transferred  to  number  Seven.  The  testimony  does  not  show  when 
the  school-house  was  built  in  number  Seven,  nor  whether  the  land 
on  which  plaintiff  resides  has  ever  been  taxed  to  build  a  school- 
house. 

If  the  school-house  was  built  prior  to  1861- — and  we  infer  that  it 
was — the  reason  for  transferring  plaintiff  to  number  Six,  now  would 
have  retained  him  there  then.  Montrose  is  comparatively  an  old 
and  well-settled  district,  and  the  necessity  for  a  school-house  must 
have  been  apparent  in  1861,  as  well  as  in  1862.  The  inequality  in 
the  Dumber  of  pupils  and  the  shape  of  the  territory  of  each  sub- 
district  we  do  not  in  this  case  consider  essential.  Personal  con- 
venience and  private  advantage,  should  generally,  perhaps  always, 
be  secondary  to  the  public  accommodation  and  the  common  good. 
The  genius  of  our  institutions  requires  this,  and  nowhere  is  the  ap- 
plication of  this  principle  more  appropriate  than  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  school  law. 

We  have  found  some  difficulty  in  determining  the  case  before  us; 
for  the  record  does  not  disclose  facts  sufficient  to  make  it  entirely 
clear. 

The  county  superintendent  gave  the  case  a  fair  and  patient  hear 
ing,  and  after  due  deliberation  decided  "  that  neither  justice,  equity 
nor  the  interests  of  the  people  "  required  that  the  plaintiff  should  be 
transferred  from  sub-district  number  Seven  to  sub-district  number 
Six;  and  he  accordingly  reversed  the  action  of  the  board  in  the 
premises,  and  his  decision  is  AFFIRMED. 

OKAN  FAYILLE, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

July  29,  1864. 


JANE    BROWN    et    al.,  Appellants  v.   THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 

RICHLAND. 

Appeal  from  Tama  County. 

SUB  DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES*  Change  of.    In  changing  sub-district  boundaries, 
both  the  present  and  future  welfare  ot  the  district  should  be  considered. 

The  board  of  said  district  township,  at   their  regular  meeting  in 
September,  1864,  chai.ged  the  boundaries  of  certain  sub-districts, 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  21 


Jane  Brown  v.  The  District  Township  of  Richland. 


whereby  sub-district  number  Seven  and   a  portion   of  sub-district 
number  One,  were  attached  to  sub-district  number  Five. 

From  this  order  of  the  board  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county 
superintendent,  who,  after  a  full  and  fair  investigation  of  the  case, 
sustained  the  action  of  the  board.  From  his  decision  an  appeal  is 
brought  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

It  is  not  claimed  that  either  the  board  of  directors  or  the  county 
superintendent  committed  errors  in  law  or  exceeded  their  jurisdiction 
Everything  seems  to  have  been  done  fairly  and  openly,  and  a   final 
decision  of  the  case  is  asked  for  solely  on  the  ground  of  equity  and 
justice. 

Appellants  claim  that  sub-district  number  Seven  has  a  good 
school  of  thirty-four  scholars,  and  that  by  the  proposed  change, 
three-fourths  of  these  pupils  will  be  cut  oif  from  school  privileges  in 
consequence  of  their  distance  from  the  proposed  site  of  the  new 
school-house. 

But  it  is  shown  by  testimony  that  by  building  a  bridge  across  a 
a  certain  stream  the  distance  will  be  diminished,  so  that  all  parties 
will  be  accommodated.  But  there  is  no  assurance  in  the  record  be- 
fore us  that  the  bridge  will  be  built  this  year  or  next.  Meanwhile  a 
large  number  of  children  may  be  deprived  of  a  school.  As  a  gen- 
eral rule  it  is  better  to  have  large  sub-districts  with  a  good  school- 
house  well  furnished,  than  to  have  small  sub-districts  with  small  and 
poorly  furnished  school-houses. 

We  believe  the  board  had  in  view  the  welfare  of  the  whole  district, 
as  did  also  the  county  superintendent  in  confirming  their  action,  but 
we  can  see  no  injustice  in  this  case  in  allowing  the  sub-districts  to 
remain  another  year  without  change,  or  until  the  proposed  bridge  is 
built.  The  reason  for  consolidating  the  sub-dist;icts  now  will  prob- 
ably exist  then,  and  the  occasion  for  complaint  will  then  be  removed. 

In  this  view  of  the  case  we  feel  compelled  to  reverse  the  decision 
of  the  county  superintendent. 

REVERSED. 
ORAJST  FAVILLE, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

March  1,  1865. 


22  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Sarah  E.  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Albion. 
\ 

SARAH  E.  SMITH  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  ALBION,  Appellant. 
Appeal  from  Howard  County. 

TEACHERS  :  Right  of  to  inflict  punishment  uporitheir  puptts.  A  s  chool-master  who 
stands  in  loco  pa/rentis  may,  in  proper  cases,  inflict  moderate  and  reasonable 
chastisement.  The  law  confides  to  teachers  a  discretionary  power  in  the  inflic- 
tion of  punishment  upon  their  pupils,  and  will  not  hold  them  responsible  crim- 
inally, unless  the  punishment  be  such  as  to  occasion  permanent  injury  to  the 
child,  or  be  inflicted  merely  to  gratify  their  own  evil  passions. 

The  record  in  this  case  shows  that  the  plaintiff,  Sarah  E.  Smith, 
entered  into  a  contract  with  the  sub-director  of  sub-district  number 
Two,  in  said  district  township,  to  teach  a  school  four  months,  com- 
mencing on  the  19th  of  December,  1864.  That  she  commenced 
her  school  accordingly,  and  taught  until  the  30th  of  January,  1865. 
That  on  the  29th  of  January  she  was  notified  to  meet  the  board  of 
directors  to  answer  to  the  charge  of  undue  severity  in  chastising 
one  of  her  pupils;  that  she  attended  the  meeting  of  the  board  and 
made  her  defense,  but  the  board  decided  to  expel  her  from  her 
school,  paying  her  for  the  time  she  had  taught.  From  this  action 
of  the  board  she  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent  who  re- 
versed the  order  of  the  board,  and  from  the  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent  an  appeal  is  brought  to  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction. 

L.  Bullis  for  appellant. 
J*  L.  Foster  for  appellee. 

It  is  claimed  on  the  part  of  the  board  that  the  county  superin- 
tendent had  no  jurisdiction,  and  that  he  erred  in  entertaining  the 
appeal  and  reversing  the  order  of  the  board;  but  having  gone  to 
trial  before  the  county  superintendent,  and  having  submitted  the 
case,  after  making  their  delense,  they  can  not  now  plead  want  of 
jurisdiction. 

The  testimony  shows  that  the  pupil,  a  boy  of  some  twelve  years 
of  age,  did  not  like  the  seat  assigned  him  by  the  teacher  and  asked 
permission  to  go  out,  which  was  given;  that  he  started  toward 
home ;  that  the  teacher  called  to  him  to  come  back,  threatening  to 
punish  him  if  he  disobeyed ;  that  he  went  home  and  remained  out 
of  school  about  a  week;  that  at  the  close  of  the  school  on  the  day 
he  returned,  the  teacher  reminded  him  of  the  punishment  threat- 
ened, and  proceeded  to  administer  it,  striking  him  over  the  shoul- 
ders and  back  with  a  whip  furnished  by  one  of  the  pupils;  that  the 
boy  resisted,  striking  back,  snatching  away  the  whip,  and  using  bad 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISION-3.  23 


Sarah  E.  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Albion. 

language;  that  the  teacher  obtained  another  whip— a  willow  switch 
— and  administered  several  strokes  with  it,  some  of  which  were 
across  his  head  and  face,  in  consequence  of  which  one  of  the  boy's 
eyes  was  apparently  injured.  An  older  brother  of  the  boy  then  in- 
terfered, and  the  "  affray  ended." 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  teacher  punished  hastily  or  in  anger, 
or  that  it  would  have  been  too  severe,  or  improperly  administered, 
had  the  boy  not  resisted.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  resistence 
justified  the  teacher  in  striking  the  boy  across  the  head  and  thereby 
causing  an  injury — fortunately  temporary — to  one  of  his  eyes.  The 
county  superintendent  regarded  this  as  accidental,  and  as  no  perma- 
nent injury  was  sustained,  justified  the  teacher. 

Much  has  been  written  during  the  last  twenty-five  years  in  re- 
gard to  the  proper  means  to  be  used  for  maintaining  the  authority 
of  the  teacher  over  the  pupils.  We  can  remember  when  the  whip 
was  applied  very  frequently  and  very  severely — when  the  pupil 
obeyed  from  fear  of  punishment,  and  not  from  any  sense  of  duty  or 
of  respect  for  authority.  Since  that  time  there  has  been  a  great 
change — appeals  to  reason,  to  a  sense  of  duty — and  to  right  have 
been  successfully  used  by  the  most  competent  teachers.  In  many 
schools  the  rod  is  excluded,  and  yet  ready  and  cheerful  obedience  is 
secured  from  the  pupils.  We  wish  such  a  result  could  be  reached 
in  all  the  schools;  that  the  teacher  could  inspire  the  pupils  with 
such  a  love  for  order — for  good  government  and  for  rightful  author- 
ity ;  with  such  a  love  for  right-doing  and  such  a  hate  for  wrong-do- 
ing, that  it  would  only  be  necessary  to  point  out  the  path  of  duty 
instead  of  the  command  to  walk  ia  it.  While  family  government 
and  the  public  sentiment  of  some  communities  may  render  such  a 
course  possible,  the  want  of  family  government  and  the  loose  reins 
given  to  " Young  America"  in  many  communities  require  strong 
and  physical  force  to  hold  in  subjection  unsubdued  nature. 

All  admit  that  the  teacher  must  maintain  authority,  and  for  that 
purpose  he  is  sustained  by  the  highest  authorities  in  inflicting 
moderate  punishment. 

In  Kent's  Commentaries,  9th  edition,  volume  2,  page  222,  is  the 
following:  "A  school- master  who  stands  in  loco  par  entis,  may  in 
proper  cases  inflict  moderate  and  reasonable  chastisement." 

In  Wharton's  American  Criminal  Law,  5th  edition,  Yol.  1,  page 
669,  is  the  following: 

"  The  law  confides  to  school-masters  and  teachers  a  discretionary 
power  in  the  infliction  of  punisment  upon  their  pupils,  and  w.ll  not 
hold  them  responsible  criminally,  unless  the  punishment  be  such  as 
to  occasion  permanent  injury  to  the  child,  or  be  inflicted  merely  to 
gratify  their  own  evil  passions." 

State  v.  PendergrasS)  2  Dev.  and  Bat.  407. 


24  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Sarah  E.  Smith  v.  The  District  Townshp  of  Albion. 


a  On  the  trial  of  an  indictment  of  a  school-master  for  an  assault 
on  a  pupil,  the  judge  refused  to  instruct  the  jury  that  the  defendant 
was  criminally  liable  for  punishing  a  pupil  only  when  he  acted 
malo  animo,  from  vindictive  feeling,  passion  or  ill-will,  or  inflicted 
more  punishment  than  was  necessary  to  secure  obedience,  and  not 
for  error  of  opinion  or  judgment,  provided  he  was  governed  by  an 
honest  purpose  to  promote  discipline  and  the  highest  welfare  of  the 
school,  and  the  best  interests  of  the  child;  and  instructed  them 
that  in  inflicting  corporal  punishment  a  teacher  must  exercise 
reasonable  judgment  and  discretion,  and  be  governed  as  to  the 
mode  and  severity  of  the  punishment  by  the  nature  of  the  offense,  the 
age,  size,  and  apparent  powers  of  endurance  of  the  pupil."-  -Com- 
momwealth  v.  Itandall,  4  Gray,  (Mass.)  36. 

"  If  there  is  any  reasonable  doubt  that  the  punishment  was 
excessive,  the  master  should  have  the  benefit  of  it." — Lander  v. 
Seaver,  32  Yt.,  (3  Shaw)  114. 

We  add  the  following  as  having  some  bearing  on  this  case: 

"  Though  a  school-master  has  in  general  no  right  to  punish  a 
pupil  for  misconduct  committed  after  the  dismissal  of  a  school  for 
the  day,  and  the  return  of  the  pupil  to  his  home,  yet  •  he  may,  on 
the  pupil's  return  to  school,  punish  him  for  any  misbehavior,  though 
committed  out  of  school,  which  has  a  direct  and  immediate  tendency 
to  injure  the  school  and  to  subvert  the  master's  authority." — Lander 
v.  Seaver,  supra. 

Many  other  authorities  might  be  cited  establishing  the  authority 
of  the  teacher  to  inflict  punishment  necessary  for  securing  obedience 
to  reasonable  rules.  As  it  is  not  shown  in  this  case  that  the  rules 
were  unreasonable  or  the  punishment  severe,  (the  teacher  must  have 
the  benefit  of  the  doubt  in  regard  to  the  manner  of  punishing,)  the 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is 

AFFIRMED. 

OKAN  FAYILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
April  22d,  1865. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  25 


Nathaniel  Taylor  v.  The  District  Township  of  Makee. 


NATHANIEL  TAYLOR  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  MAKEE,  Appel- 
lant, 

Appeal  from  Allamakee  County. 

JURISDICTION.  The  affidavit  must  show  iliat  the  affiant  is  a  citizen  injuriously 
affected  by  the  action  of  the  board,  giving  sufficient  data  to  establish  his  claim 
to  a  hearing. 

At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district 
township  in  September,  1864,  portions  of  sub-district  number 
Four  were  set  off  to  sub -districts  numbers  Five  and  Seven.  From 
this  action  of  the  board  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent, who  reversed  the  order  of  the  board  for  two  reasons,  viz : 
"  A  majority  of  the  board  had  not  voted  for  such  change,  nor 
did  justice  and  equity  demand  it."  Notwithstanding  this  decis- 
ion, a  special  meeting  of  the  board  was  called  to  consider  the 
same  question,  at  which  meeting  a  majority  of  the  board  voted 
to  make  the  same  changes  as  had  been  attempted  at  the  regular 
meeting.  An  appeal  was  again  taken,  and  the  county  superin- 
tendent again  reversed  the  order  of  the  board,  and  from  his 
decision  an  appeal  is  brought  to  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction. 

L.  0.  Hatch,  for  appellant. 
Charles  Paulk,  for  appellee. 

Counsel  for  appellant  presents  a  well  considered,  logical  argu- 
ment, attempting  to  show  that  the  county  superintendent  had  no 
jurisdiction,  assigning  as  reasons  that  the  affidavit  was  not  sufficient 
to  initiate  the  appeal,  and  that  the  superintendent  erred  in  entertain- 
ing the  motion  to  amend. 

The  law  relating  to  appeals  is  embraced  in  a  few  brief  sentences, 
and  much  must  be  left  to»the  discretion  and  good  sense  of  those 
administering  it,  provided  always  that  ''justice  and  equity  are  impar- 
tially meted  out." 

'^  The  law  does  not  state  just  how  much  the  affidavit  must  contain. 
It  need  not  recite  all  the  facts  relating  to  the  case  (see  decision  in 
appeal  from  Lee  county,  published  in  the  School  Journal,  Septem- 
ber, 1864:).  It  must  show  that  the  affiant  is  a  citizen  injuriously 
affected  by  the  action  of  the  board,  giving  sufficient  data  to  establish 
his  claim  to  a  hearing. 

si 


26  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Nathaniel  Taylor  v.  The  District  Township  of  Makee. 

The  affidavit  in  question  shows  that  the  order  of  the  board  takes 
territory  from  a  comparatively  small  sub-district  that  has  no  school- 
house,  and  adds  to  it  a  lar^e  sub-district  having  a  school-house. 
That  the  affiant  in  common  with  other  residents  of  the  said  sub- 
district  thus  diminished,  is  aggrieved.  That  one  item  in  the  griev- 
ance is  shown  in  the  resolution  of  the  board  attempting  to  regulate 
the  prospective  taxes  on  the  said  territory,  thus  clearly  indicating 
that  each  sub-district  was  accustomed  to  raise  its  own  school-house 
fund. 

The  motion  to  dismiss  the  case  was  therefore  very  properly 
overruled. 

The  position  of  appellant's  counsel  that  the  affiant  must  show 
a  special  personal  grievance  to  entitle  him  to  a  hearing,  is  not,  in 
our  opinion,  well  taken. 

Any  other  resident  of  the  said  sub-disfrict  was  equally  entitled 
to  a  hearing,  and  was,  in  one  sense,  equally  aggrieved.  Affiant 
appeals  for  himself,  and  it  may  be  assumed  in  behalf  of  his  sub- 
district  The  grievance  was  general  as  well  as  personal;  affiant's 
injury  may  be  small,  but  the  aggregate  injustice  to  the  sub-district 
may  be  great.  To  assume  that  the  plaintiff  has  no  cause  of  action 
or  can  not  "  get  into  court,"  unless  his  petition  or  affidavit  shows 
that  the  action  of  the  board  especially  injures  him,  would  effect- 
ually exclude  all  hope  of  redress  in  cases  similar  to  the  one  under 
review. 

Believing  that  the  affidavit  shows  sufficient  cause  for  a  hearing 
we  need  not  notice  the  argument  tending  to  show  that  the  super- 
intendent erred  in  entertaing  the  motion  to  amend. 

It  may  be  assumed  that  the  law  enjoining  certain  duties  on  any 
officer,  clothes  that  officer,  in  the  absence  of  express  limitations, 
with  authority  to  use  the  requisite  means  for  the  performance  of 
those  duties. 

In  the  administration  of  the  school  laws  the  statutes  must  be 
liberally  construed;  and  nice  technicalities  must  not  debar  the 
claims  of  equity. 

We  have  no  hesitation  therefore  in  agreeing  with  the  county 
superintendent. 

AFFIRMED. 

OEAN  FAVILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
June  1,  1865. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


D.  E.  Stine  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wahkonsa. 


D.  E.  STINE  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  WAHKONSA,  Appellant. 

Appeal  from   Webster  County. 
RECORDS  :    Defective.    May  be  amended. 

The  board  of  supervisors  of  said  county  at  their  regular  meeting 
in  January,  1865,  set  off  certain  territory  from  the  township  of 
Washington  to  the  township  of  "Wahkonsa.  On  the  28th  day  of 
the  same  month  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of 
Wahkonsa  made  an  order  conforming  the  boundary  of  said  district 
township  to  that  of  the  civil  township,  and  attaching  the  annexed 
territory  to  sub-district  number  One,  of  the  said  district  township. 
From  this  order  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superintendent, 
who  reversed  the  action  of  the  board,  and  from  his  decision  the 
board  appeals. 

G.  W.  Bassett  for  appellant. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 

The  only  point  in  issue  in  this  case  is  whether  the  board  com- 
plied with  the  law  in  changing  the  boundaries  of  the  district. 

The  record  of  the  board  is  defective  in  not  more  particularly 
describing  the  territory  in  question  and  in  not  having  a  plat  show- 
ing the  change  of  boundaries.  The  record  however  shows  that 
provision  was  made  for  furnishing  such  a  plat,  and  that  the  board 
had  attempted  in  good  faith  to  regulate  the  boundaries  of  the  dis- 
trict in  accordance  with  a  petition  of  the  people  to  the  board  of 
supervisors. 

The  law  does  not  limit  the  time  within  which  the  plat  shall  be 
made  and  recorded,  and  as  alterations  in  district  boundaries  do  not 
take  effect  until  the  first  Monday  in  March,  the  board  should  have 
until  that  time  to  complete  their  records. 

The  county  superintendent  decides  that  the  board  acted  in  good 
faith  and  for  the  best  interests  of  the  public;  and  we  think  he 
should  have  allowed  the  board  to  correct  and  perfect  the  district 
records. 

REVERSED. 

ORAN  FAVILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
June  12,  1865. 


28  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Jacob  Markle  v.  The  District  Township  of  Maquoketa. 


JACOB  MARKLE,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  MAQUO- 
KETA. 

Appeal  from  Jackson  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  TAX. — When  the  electors  of  a  sub-district  have  determined  and 
certified  a  sum  of  money  to  the  district  township  meeting  for  the  purpose  of 
erecting  a  school-house,  the  maximum  rate  should  be  levied  from  year  to  year 
until  the  whole  amount  is  raised. 

On  the  first  Monday  in  March,  1864,  the  electors  of  sub-district 
number  Five,  in  said  district  township,  adopted  the  following  reso- 
lution : 

"Resolved,  That  the  district  township  be  recpested  to  levy  a  tax 
on  the  taxable  property  of  the  district  township  sufficient  to  raise 
the  sum  of  eight  hundred  dollars  for  erecting  a  scho ./1-house  in  this 
sub-district  number  Five." 

The  district  township  electors  at  their  annual  meeting  refused  to 
vote  any  sum  for  building  a  school-house  in  said  sub-district ;  but 
the  board  of  directors  at  their  regular  meeting  in  April  following, 
voted  a  tax  of  ten  mills  on  the  dollar  on  the  taxable  property  of 
sub-district  number  Five. 

Also  at  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  said  dis- 
trict township  in  April,  1865,  it  was  decided  to  levy  another  tax  of 
ten  mills  on  the  dollar  on  sub-district  number  Five,  though  no  vote 
for  that  purpose  had  been  reported  from  the  annual  meeting  of  the 
sub-district.  From  this  decision  of  the  board  an  appeal  was  taken 
to  the  county  superintendent,  who  sustained  the  action  of  the  board, 
and  from  his  decision  the  plaintiff  appeals. 

The  only  question  to  be  determined  is  whether  the  board  had 
authority  to  levy  this  second  tax  without  a  vote  of  the  electors 
requesting  it. 

The  law  conferring  authority  to  vote  a  tax  fixes  the  maximum  levy 
for  any  one  year,  but  does  not  limit  the  gross  amount  that  may  be 
raised  for  school-house  fund. 

It  is  optional  with  the  elctors  to  determine  by  vote  the  gross 
amount  needed,  or  to  vote  each  year  a  certain  per  cent  of  tax  for 
school-house  fund.  When  the  electors  request  a  tax  of  a  certrin 
number  of  mills  on  the  dollar,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  board  to  simply 
execute  their  request ;  but  where  a  gross  amount  is  voted  without 
designating  the  per  centum,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  board  to  levy  a 
tax  at  the  maximum  rates  from  year  to  year,  until  the  whole  amount 
is  raised. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  9<J 


Christopher  McNutt  v.  The  District  Township  of  Hanover. 


Uader  this  construction  of  the  law  the  board  was  justified  in  levy- 
ing a  tax  for  1865,  and  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is 

AFFIRMED. 

OKAN  FAVILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  11,  18G5. 


CHNISTOPHER   McNuTT  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  HANOVER, 

Appellant. 

Appeal  from  Allamakee  Comity. 

BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS  ;  Power  of  to  erect  school-house.    The  board  can  not  con- 
tract for  school-house  without  authority  from  the  electors. 

At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district 
township  in  April,  1865,  the  plaintiff  and  other  residents  of  sub- 
district  number  Three  presented  a  petition  to  the  board  asking  for 
the  establishment  of  an  additional  school  in  said  sub-district.  The 
board  refused  to  grant  the  petition.  The  plaintiff  appealed  to  the 
county  euperin  fen  dent  who  reversed  the  order  of  the  board,  and 
from  this  decision  the  board  appeals. 

JR.   Wilbur  for  appellant. 
L.  O.  Hatch  for  appellee. 

From  the  petition,  the  testimony  and  the  pleadings,  we  infer  that 
two  things  were  asked  of  the  board:  first,  to  make  arrangements  for 
building  an  additional  school-house;  second,  to  provide  for  a  school 
in  a  temporary  building  until  the  new  house  could  be  erected. 

First :  The  board  had  no  authority  to  make  arrangements  for 
building  a  school-house  unless  the  question  had  been  previously 
submitted  to  the  electors  at  their  annual  sub-district  meeting,  and 
an  affirmative  vote  had  been  given.  Of  which,  there  is  no  evi- 
dence. 

Second:  The  board  had  authority  to  provide  for  an  additional 
school  (if  a  suitable  building  could  be  secured),  and  had  power  to 
increase  the  tax  for  the  teachers'  fund  and  the  contingent  fund 


3Q  SUHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Sol.  McReynolds  v.  The  District  Township  of  Competine. 

sufficient  for  maintaining  such  school,  if  in  their  judgment  the  cir- 
cumstances H9*r*ydoc?  ^uch  action. 

1.  Of  course  the   plaintiff  was  not  aggrieved  by  the  refusal  of 
the  board  to  build  a  new  school-house,  and  had  no  cause  for  appeal; 
for  the  board  had  no  authority  to  build. 

2.  Admitting  his  right  to  appeal  from  the  action  of  the  board 
refusing  to  provide  a  temporary  school  (which,  under  the  circum- 
stances, is  very  doubtful),  what  would  be  the  effect  of  reveising  the 
order  of  the  board  1 

It  would  simply  leave  the  case  in  statu  quo.  A  writ  of  man- 
damus would  be  necessary  to  enforce  action  on  the  part  of  the 
board,  and  it  is  doubtful  whether  a  writ  would  issue  in  such  a 
case. 

We  need  not  review  the  merits  of  this  case,  as  it  can  be 
determined  ou  uu  question  of  law.  The  county  superintendent 
would  have  been  justified  in  dismissing  the  case  for  want  of  juris- 
diction. 

EEVKKSED. 

ORAN  FAYILLE, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  19,  1865. 


SOL.  MCREYNOLDS,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  COM- 
PETINE. 

Appeal  from   Wapello  County. 

APPEAL.  Waiver  of  right  of.  Where  an  agreement  between  the  parties 
stipulates  that  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  shall  be  final,  the  case 
will  not  be  heard  by  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  on  appeal. 

The  affidavit  in  this  case  was  filed  in  this  office  on  the  17th  day 
of  July,  1865,  and  on  the  same  day  the  county  superintendent  was 
duly  served  with  notice  of  the  filing  and  directed  to  send  up  a 
transcript  of  the  record  of  proceedings  in  the  case -within  thirty 
days  from  said  day  named. 

On  the  first  day  of  August,  1865,  a  paper  certified  by  the  county 
superintendent  to  be  the  only  record  made  by  him  on  the  trial  of 
the  cause  before  him,  was  duly  filed.  This  transcript  develops  the 
fact  that  on  the  trial  counsel  on  both  sides  agreed  that  the  ruling 


•SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  31 


John  A.  Mclntosh  v.  The  District  Township  of  Gallant's  Grove. 

of  the  c  unty  superintendent,  rendered  after  having  duly  considered 
the  evidence  and  Argument  of  counsel,  should  be  received  as  a  final 
determination  of  the  cause,  and  that  no  appeal  should  be  taken  in 
the  premises. 

Hendershott  &  Burton  for  appellant. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 

"  The  court  of  appeals  has  the  power  to  enforce  a  mutual  stipula- 
tion, made  between  the  parties  in  the  court  from  which  the  appeal 
is  taken,  by  which  they  agreed  that  the  decision  should  be  final,  and 
that  no  appeal  should  be  taken.  The  duty  of  hearing  appeals,  in- 
volves the  jurisdiction  to  determine  whether  a  particular  case  is 
properly  before  the  court  on  appeal,  and  to  dismiss  it,  if  brought  in 
violation  of  the  agreement  of  the  parties."  See  syllabus  to  Town- 
send  v.  Mastersnn  <&o.,  Stone  Dressing  Company  et  al.,  15  N.  Y. 
Rep.,  page  587;  and  closing  portion  of  the  opinion  of  DENIO,  C.  J., 
in  same  case,  page  589,  as  follows:  "We  should  not  regard  any 
less  authentic  evidence  of  such  an  arrangement  than  a  plain  stipu- 
lation in  writing;  but  when  we  are  furnished  with  such  evidence, 
and  especially  when  the  court  from  which  the  appeal  is  taken  has 
sanctioned  the  agreement  by  making  it  a  part  of  the  record,  (as  in 
the  case  at  bar,)  we  ought  to  enforce  it  by  refusing  to  pass  upon  the 
questions  which  have  thus  formally  been  waived." 

In  view  of  the  foregoing,  it  is  considered  that  the  right  of  appeal 
has  been  waived  by  the  parties  in  making  this  agreement;  that  the 
case  is  not  properly  before  this  tribunal  for  its  adjudication,  and  the 
same  is  therefore  DISMISSED. 

ORAJST  FAVILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
August  2d,  1865. 


JOHN    A.  MclNTOSH   v.  THE    DISTRICT    TOWNSHIP  OF  GALLANT'S 
GrtovE,  Appellant. 

Appeal  from  Shelby  County. 

SCHOOL  HOUSE  :  Power  of  Hit  board  to  Ivild.  If  in  their  judgment  the 
wants  of  a  sub-district  require,  the  board  are  empowered  to  erect  a  school-house 
without  action  on  the  part  of  the  electors  of  the  sub-district. 

The  plaintiff  appeals  from  the  action  of  the  board  of  directors,  in 
approving  a  contract  for  building  a  school-house  in  the  sub-district 
of  which  the  plaintiff  is  a  resident,  for  the  following  reasons  : 


32  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


John  A.  Mclntosh  v.  The  District  Township  of  Gallant's  Grove. 

1.  "  The   house  was  ordered  to  be  built  against  the  wishes  of  a 
majority  of  the  electors  of  said  sub-district. 

2.  "A  house  was  already  leased   for  school  purposes,  and  there 
was  no  need  of  a  new  house." 

The  county  superintendent  investigated  the  case  and  set  aside  the 
action  of  the  board  in  the  premises,  and  from  this  decision  the  board 
appeals. 

The  record  shows  that  a  lease  was  executed  in  February,  1863, 
for  the  use  of  a  house  for  school  purposes  in  said  sub-district  for  live 
years.  This  contract  was  signed  by  the  lessor  and  the  sub-director; 
but  there  is  no  evidence  that  it  was  approved  by  the  board  or 
signed  by  its  president.  No  objection  however  seems  to  have  been 
made  to  the  lease  on  this  account.  Strict  construction  of  the  law, 
however,  would  not  consider  this  a  valid  lease. 

At  the  annual  meeting  of  the  electors  in  said  sub-district  in  1  864, 
a  resolution  was  adopted  requesting  the  district  township  meeting  to 
levy  a  tax  of  five  mills  on  the  township  for  the  purpose  of  building 
a  school-house  in  said  sub-district.  It  seems  that  no  action  was 
taken  by  the  board  that  year  ;  but  at  its  regular  meeting  in  April, 
1865,  the  board  authorized  the  building  of  a  school-house  in  said 
sub-district,  although  no  action  was  taken  by  the  electors  at  their 
annual  meeting  in  March  previous. 

The  superintendent  reversed  the  action  of  the  board  fur  the  fol- 
lowing reasons  : 

1.  The  board  has  no  right  to  buiVi  a  school-house  unless  asked 
to  do  so  by  the  electors  of  the  sub- district. 

2.  The  sub-district  in  question  had  a  house  leased  for   school 
purposes  for  a  term  of  years. 

3.  The  district  has  no  right  to  force  a  house  upon  a  sub-district. 
The  first  and  second  positions  of  the  superintendent  are  not   well 

taken;  for  the  evidence  shows  that  the  electors  in  1864  did  request 
a  tax  to  build  a  house,  as  the  request  was  not  withdrawn  in  1865,  it 
was  still  before  the  board  ;  second,  admitting  that  the  lease  was 
valid,  the  circumstances  of  the  sub-district  may  have  changed  so  as 
to  require  a  new  house,  and  this  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that 
a  tax  was  requested  in  1864. 

His  third  proposition  may,  as  a  general  rule,  hold  true.  Yet  there 
are  cases  where  the  electors  of  a  district  township  would  doubtless 
be  justified  in  voting  a  tax  to  build  a  house  in  a  sub-district  not  re- 
questing it.  There  may  possibly  be  communities  feeling  so  little 
interest  in  the  education  of  their  children  that  they  are  not  willing  to 
bear  a  share  of  the  expense  necessary  to  maintain  schools.  In  such 
cases  there  should  be  power  somewhere  to  see  that  schools  are  pro- 
vided, and  that  power  must  rest  with  a  majority  of  the  electors  of 
the  district  township  and  with  the  board  of  directors. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  33 


August  Steigelder  v.  The  Board  of  Directors  of  the  District  Township  of  German. 

In  the  above  case  we  feel  compelled  to  differ  with  the  county   su- 
perintendent, and  his  decision  is 

EEVERSED. 
GRAN  FAVILLE, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
November  15,  1865. 


AUGUST  STEIGELDER,  v.  THE  BOARD  OF    DIRECTORS    OF  THE  DIS- 
TRICT TOWNSHIP  OF  GERMAN,  Appellant. 

Appeal  from  Keoltuk  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE  :  Location  of.  The  county  superintendent,  on  appeal, 
may  fix  the  site  of  school-house. 

The  records  in  this  case  show  that  the  board  of  directors  in  said 
district  fixed  a  site  for  a  school-house  in  one  of  the  sub-districts  of 
said  township;  that  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county 
superintendent  who  reversed  the  action  of  the  board;  that 
the  board  fixed  another  site,  and  that  an  appeal  was  again  taken 
to  the  county  superintendendent,  who  again  reversed  the  order  of 
the  board,  and  then  fixed  a  new  site  for  the  school-house,  and  that 
the  board  now  appeals  from  this  order  of  the  county  superintendent 
fixing  the  site  for  the  school-house,  to  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction. 

The  main  point  relied  upon  in  the  argument  of  appellant  is  that 
the  county  superintendent  exceeded  his  authority  in  the  premises; 
that  he  had  no  jurisdiction  in  the  matter  further  than  to  reverse  or 
affirm  the  order  of  the  board.  The  23d  section  of  chapter  1  of  the 
school  laws,  and  the  "explanatory  notes"  are  relied  on  to  justify  this 
position. 

This  question  has  never  before,  we  believe,  been  officially  determ-  . 
ined,  and  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  law  providing  for  appeals 
should  be  so  expressed  as  to  leave  a  doubt  as  to  its  meaning. 
Section  129,  page  72  of  the  law  says,  uhe  (the  county  superintend- 
ent) shall  make  such  decisions  as  may  be  just  and  equitable,"  &c. 
Do  these  words  limit  the  superintendent  to  simply  affirming  or 
reversing  the  action  of  the  board?  If  so  the  object  of  the  law 
might  be  defeated,  and  questions  of  the  kind  under  review  might 
never  be  settled ;  for  the  board  could  fix  a  new  site  so  near  the 
one  rejected  by  the  county  superintendent,  as  to  make  it'  equally 
objectionable,  and  thus  there  might  be  no  end  to  appeals,  and  the 

so 


34  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Dobbins  and  Briggs  v.  District  Township  of  Salem. 


people,  meanwhile,  might  be  deprived  of  schools.  The  design  of 
the  law  of  appeal  is  to  redress  grievances,  to  correct  errors  of  the 
board,  and  to  make  such  just  and  equitable  decisions  as  shall  pro- 
mote the  interests  of  our  public  schools.  But  we  are  relieved  from 
the  necessity  of  discussing  this  question  at  length,  by  the  opinion  of 
the  Attorney-General,  published  in  the  April  number  of  the  JOUR- 
NAL. We  quote  the  conclusion  of  his  opinion:  "Matters  of  both 
law  and  fact  are  brought  on  appeal.  When  the  matter  appealed 
comes  before  the  county  superintendent  he  is  to  hear  testimony  and 
try  and  determine  the  whole  matter  in  issue.  In  this  case  the 
matter  in  issue  is  the  proper  site  to  be  fixed  for  a  school-house, 
and  this  he  is  to  determine.  The  case  does  not  come  before 
him  merely  to  correct  an  error  of  the  board  of  directors,  but 
to  hear  and  decide  the  same  matter  that  the  board  had  de- 
cided. I  think  that  the  county  superintendent  is  not  limited  to 
a  reversal  or  affirmance  of  the  action  of  the  board,  but  he  determines 
the  same  question  which  it  had  determined,  and,  that  in  the  case 
stated,  -the  county  superintendent  is  the  proper  party  to  fix  the  site 
of  the  school-house." — School  Journal,  April,  1866. 

Guided  by  the  opinion  of  our  highest  legal  adviser^  the  decision  of 
the  county  superintendent  is 

AFFIRMED. 
OEAIST  FAYILLE, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

April  12.   1866. 


DOBBINS  AND  BRIGGS  v.  DISTRICT   TOWNSHIP   OF   SALEM,    Appel- 
lants. 

Appeal  from  Henry  county. 

APPEAL.— An  appeal  will  not  lie  from  an  order  of  a  board  of  directors  making 
a  change  in  the  boundaries  of  the  district  township,  where  the  concurrence  af 
the  board  of  an  adjoining  district  township  is  necessary  to  effect  the  change. 

In  January,  1866,  the  appellees  and  others,  presented  a  petition 
to  said  board,  requesting  a  change  in  the  boundaries  of  said  district 
township,  so  that  certain  residents  therein  might  be  set  off  to  the 
independent  district  of  Salem. 

The  board  decided  not  to  grant  the  request  of  petitioners ;  from 
which  decision  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superintendent, 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  35 


Dobbins  and  Briggs  v.  District  Township  of  Salem. 

who  after  a  protracted  and  patient  investigation,  reversed  the  decis- 
ion of  the  board,  and  ordered  changes  to  be  made  in  the  boundaries 
of  the  district  township,  by  which  certain  territory  was  transferred  to 
the  independent  district,  and  from  his  decision  an  appeal  is  taken  to 
the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

T.   W.    Woolson,  for  appellants. 
'No  appearance  for  appellees. 

This  is  an  interesting  case  from  the  fact  that  it  presents  a  question 
not  before  determined,  to- wit  :  whether  the  county  superintendent 
has  jurisdiction  in  a  matter  requiring  the  concurrent  action  of  differ- 
ent school  boards.  If  this  question  is  answered  in  the  affirmative, 
then  the  various  points  raised  by  counsel  must  be  examined,  and 
the  case  must  be  determined  on  its  merits  ;  but  if  answered  in  the 
negative,  no  discussion  of  the  various  issues  raised  is  necessary. 

It  has  heretofore  been  held,  and  is  still  held,  that  the  county 
superintendent  has  authority  to  affirm  or  reverse  the  action  of  school 
boards  in  changing  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts  ;  but  all  cases  of 
this  kind  hitherto  determined  have  been  confined  to  the  action  of 
boards  affecting  territory  within  their  respective  district  townships. 
The  present  case  relates  to  the  transfer  of  territory  from  the  district 
township,  under  the  control  of  one  board,  to  the  independent  dis- 
trict under  the  jurisdiction  of  another  board.  The  cases  are  not 
analogous.  In  the  former  case  the  board  has  complete  authority, 
and  the  action  taken  is  final,  unless  reviewed  within  a  limited  time ;  but 
in  the  latter  case,  one  board  initiates  a  movement  which  is  completed 
or  not  at  the  option  of  another  board.  In  other  words,  neither 
board  has  complete  jurisdiction  ;  and  it  necessarily  follows  that 
the  county  superintendent  having  only  appe'la'-e  jurisdiction,  can 
not  assume  original  jurisdiction  and  do  what  the  board  could  not  do 
from  whose  action  the  appeal  was  taken. 

Having  arrived  at  this  conclusion,  in  which  we  are  sustained  by 
the  attorney-general,  we  feel  obliged  to  disagree  with  the  county 
superintendent,  and  his  decision  is  therefore 

REVERSED. 

OR  AN  FAVILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruct' '01. 
July  23,  1866. 


36  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


C.  W.  Johnson  v.  The  District  Township  of  Monroe. 


C.  W.  JOHNSON  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF   MONROE,  Appel- 
lants. 

Appeal  from  Madison  County. 

SCHO  'L-iiousa  TAX  :  Where  it  has  been  the  uniform  custom  to  apportion  the 
school-house  tax  among  the  several  sub-distric-s,  the  board  are  not  goverened  by 
a  vote  of  the  electors  instructing  them  to  levy  the  tax  directly  upon  the  property 
of  a  sub-district. 

In  April,  1866,  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district  township 
decided  to  levy  a  tax  for  building  a  school-house  in  sub-district 
number  One,  on  the  property  of  said  sub-district,  instead  of  appor- 
tioning it  among  the  several  sub-districts.  From  this  decision  an 
appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superintendent,  who  reversed  the 
action  of  the  board,  and  from  his  decision  an  appeal  is  brought  to 
this  office. 

Leonard  &  Mott  for  appellee. 

The  evidence  shows  conclusively  that  it  has  not  been  the  custom 
for  each  sub-district  to  build  its  own  school-house,  and  the  only 
reason  the  board  can  assign  for  its  action  is  an  expression  of  the 
electors  of  the  district  township  that  hereafter  each  sub-district  be 
required  to  build  its  own  school-house. 

The  law  is  plain  and  positive  on  this  subject,  and  it  is  extremely 
doubtful  whether  the  electors  can  instruct  the  board  to  pursue  a 
course  contrary  to  that  laid  down  in  the  law.  If  such  a  vote  of  the 
e'ectors  is  binding  at  all  on  the  board,  it  should  be  a  unanimous 
vote  of  all  the  electors  of  the  district  township  ;  and  even  then  the 
board  would  not  be  justified  in  acting  contrary  to  justice  and  equity. 

The  county  superintendent  in  his  decision  says,  "  The  board  of 
directors  therefore  should  have  apportioned  the  amount  necessary  to 
build  a  school-house  in  sub-district  number  One  among  the  several 
sub-districts,  taking  as  the  basis  of  apportionment  the  amounts  pre- 
viousiy  levied  on  said  sub-districts,  for  school-house  fund." 

I  entirely  agree  with  the  county  superintendent,  and  his  decis- 
ion is 

AFFIRMED. 

ORAN  FAVILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction* 
August  10,  1866. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  37 


M.  L.  Devine  v.  The  District  Township  of  Bloornfield. 


M    L.  DEVICE  v.  THE  DISTRICT   TOWNSHIP  OF  BLOOMFIELD,  Ap- 
pellants. 

Appeal  from  Polk  County. 

RECORDS:  Irregularity  or  defect  in.  An  irregularity  or  defect  in  the  records 
of  the  board,  which  does  not  injuriously  affect  the  interests  of  any,  and  is  not  of 
itself  a  violation  of  law,  will  not  render  invalid  their  official  actions  in  relation 
thereto. 

In  February,  1866,  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district  town- 
ship, among  other  changes  made  in  sub-district  boundaries,  formed 
a  new  sub-district  called  number  Six.  At  the  regular  meeting  of 
the  new  board  in  April,  it  was  decided  not  to  admit  the  sub-director 
from  sub-district  number  Six  on  the  ground  of  irregularity  or  ille- 
gality in  forming  said  sub-district.  From  this  decision  an  appeal 
was  taken  to  the  county  superintendent,  who  reversed  the  decision 
of  the  board,  and  an  appeal  is  now  brought  to  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction. 

McHenry  &  Kendall  for  appellant. 
R.  G.  db  J3.  M.  Orwig  for  appellee. 

The  reason  assigned  for  rejecting  the  sub-director  from  number 
Six  is,  that  the  notice  for  the  special  meeting  to  re-district  the  town- 
ship was  not  in  writing,  citing  a  decision  of  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction,  published  in  the  October  number  of  the  School 
Journal,  1865.  As  that  decision  has  been  approved  by  the  attor- 
ney-general, we  will  only  refer  to  it  by  stating  that  it  was  made  for 
the  purpose  of  introducing  auniform  practice  and  preventing,  in  some 
degree,  too  frequent  and  sudden  changes  in  district  boundaries  and 
of  protecting  the  rights  of  members  and  the  interests  of  sub-dis- 
tricts. 

It  sometimes  happens  [as  in  the  case  referred  to  in  the  Journal] 
that  a  verbal  notice  is  indefinite,  and  members  thus  excuse  them- 
selves from  meetings  of  the  board  and  justify  themselves  on  the 
ground  of  insufficient  notice. 

In  the  present  case  everything  seems  to  have  been  done  in  good 
faith  and  to  the  satisfaction  of  all  the  members  of  the  board  and  of 
all  the  electors  of  the  district  township,  otherwise  an  appeal  should 
have  been  taken  within  the  time  fixed  by  law.  The  district  record 
says :  "  A  special  meeting  called  by  the  president  at  the  school- 
house  in  sub-district  number  Four,  for  the  purpose  of  re-districting 


38  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


M.  L.  Devine  v.  The  District  Township  of  Bloomfield. 

the  district  township  of  Bloomfield,  on  Saturday,  February  24th, 
1866,  all  the  board  being  present." 

The  boundaries  of  each  sub-district  are  there  defined,  and  at  the 
annual  meeting  in  March,  sub-directors  are  elected,  and  no  objec- 
tions are  raised,  until  the  new  board  meets  in  April.  Now  it  is  not 
claimed  that  any  injustice  was  done  or  that  any  interest  suffered 
for  want  of  a  written  notice.  Had  this  been  shown,  there  might, 
perhaps,  have  been  some  valid  reason  for  rejecting  the  sub-director 
from  number  Six. 

The  law  requires  a  written  notice  for  the  .annual  sub-district  meet- 
ing; but  if  in  the  absence  of  any  notice  the  electors  meet  at  the 
usual  time  and  place,  and  in  good  faith  transact  the  usual  business 
of  the  annual  meeting,  the  acts  of  such  meeting  are  just  as  legal  as 
though  called  by  a  written  notice. 

The  record  shows  that  a  special  meeting  was  called  for  a  specified 
purpose,  a»d  that  that  purpose  was  accomplished;  and  if  any  one 
was  aggrieved  by  said  action,  his  remedy  was  in  an  appeal.  More- 
over, if  sub-district  number  Six  was  not  legally  established,  then  it 
follows,  evidently,  that  none  of  the  sub-districts  in  said  township 
were  legally  organized,  for  their  boundaries  were  defined  at  the 
same  time  that  number  Six  was  formed. 

The  learned  counsel  for  the  appellant  have  cited  many  authori- 
ties to  show  that  a  defective  record  is  presumptive  evidence  ol 
illegality.  But  while  all  the  material  statements  of  the  record  are 
admitted,  and  no  evidence  is  introduced  to  disprove  them,  we  can- 
not make  an  application  of  the  precedents  referred  to.  We  confess 
that  we  cannot  see  the  force  of  the  statement,  that  because  sub- 
district  number  Three  is  described  incorrectly  therefore  sub-district 
number  Six  must  be  rejected. 

The  county  superintendent  carefully  investigated  this  case  and 
arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  board  had  no  authority  to  reject 
the  sub-director  from  sub-district  number  Six;  and  his  decision  is 

AFFIRMED. 

OEAIST  FAYILLE, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
September  6,  1866. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISION?.  39 


Orpheus  King  and  Wm.  B.  King  v.  The  District  Township  of  Spring  Creek. 

ORPHEUS  KING  AND  WM.  B.  KING  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 
SPRING  CREEK,  Appellants. 

Appeal  from  Tama  County. 

JURISDICTION.  The  decisions  of  the  county  superintendent  are  reviewed  upon 
evidence  submitted  at  the  time  of  the  trial  before  the  county  superintendent. 

Two  appeals  were  brought  from  said  county,  rut  from  the  same 
district  township  and  having  reference  to  the  same  subject,  hence 
they  are  reviewed  as  one  case. 

In  May,  1866,  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district  township 
located  the  sites  for  school-houses  in  two  sub-districts ;  appeals  were 
taken  to  the  county  superintendent  who  investigated  both  cases,  and 
affirmed  the  action  of  the  board  in  one  case,  and  reversed  it  in  the 
other,  and  fixed  a  new  site;  and  from  his  decision  appeals  are 
brought  to  this  department. 

The  only  record  evidence  furnished  by  the  transcript  of  the 
county  superintendent  relates  to  the  meeting  of  the  directors 
when  the  sites  were  fixed.  There  is  no  reference  to  any  previous 
location  by  the  old  board,  no  mention  of  a  lease,  nor  of  contracts 
for  building  school-houses  on  sites,  now  claimed  by  appellants  to 
have  been  previously  located ;  no  account  of  money  orders  issued 
on  contracts — in  short,  none  of  the  proofs,  now  presented  b^ 
appellants  to  show  want  of  jurisdiction  in  the  new  board  and  con- 
sequently in  the  county  superintendent,  were  offered  in  the  appeal 
from  the  county  superintendent.  We  cannot  admit  as  evidence 
what  was  not  introduced  in  the  former  investigation.  Ample  time 
was  given  to  all  concerned  to  present  both  sides  of  the  question. 
The  county  superintendent  examined  the  several  locations  in  ques- 
tion, and  in  making  his  decision  took  into  account  the  prospective  as 
well  as  the  present  want  of  the  sub-districts.  This  was  eminently 
proper  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  law,  and  we  doubt  not 
in  accordance  with  the  wants  of  the  localities  in  question ;  for  as 
new  settlers  are  constantly  coming  in,  the  center  of  population  is 
liable  to  be  changed,  and  a  school-house  built  this  year  to  accom- 
modate three  of  four  families,  might  next  year  be  inaccessable  to 
half-a-dozen  families. 

We  trust  all  parties  will  cheerfully  acquiesce  in  the  decisions  of 
the  county  superintendent,  which  are  hereby 

AFFIRMED. 
OEAN  FAVILLE, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

October  1, 1866. 


40  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


J.  P.  Schnoeblin  v.  The  District  Township  of  Iowa. 

J.  F.  SCHNOEBLIN  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  IOWA,  Appellant. 
Appeal  from   Washington  County. 

1.  NOTICE:    All  parties  interested  and  immediately  connected  with  a  case 
should  be  notified  by  the  county  superintendent  of  the  time  aad  place  of  trial. 

2.  SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE.    In  the  location  of  a  school-house  site,  personal  ex- 
amination should  be  made  of  the  different  localities,  by  the  county  superintendent. 

The  plaintiff  appealed  from  the  action  of  the  board  of  directors 
in  locating  the  site  for  a  school-house.  The  county  superintendent 
appointed  a  day  for  hearing  the  case,  and  notified  the  parties,  but  at 
the  trial  no  one  appeared  for  the  defendant,  and  a  decision  was  ren- 
dered for  the  plaintiff;  hence  the  ease  is  brought  up  for  review. 

It  appears  that  the  defendant  did  not  receive  the  notice  of  the 
county  superintendent,  and  of  course  was  not  at  fault  in  allowing 
the  decision  to  be  rendered  on  an  exparte  hearing. 

It  seems,  moreover,  that  the  county  superintendent  was  not  able 
to  give  a  personal  examination  to  the  different  locations  claimed  as 
preferable  for  a  site.  Had  he  done  so,  we  should  feel  inclined  to 
defer  to  his  judgment;  but  from  an  examination  of  the  whole  case,  we 
think  the  site  selected  by  the  board  of  directors  a  suitable  one,  and 
the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  therefore 

REVERSED. 
ORAN  FAVILLE, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

December  3,  1866. 


C.  D.  FLYNN,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF   WHITE- 
BREAST. 

Appeal  from  Lucas    County. 

SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDAKIES: — Change  of.  The  county  superintendent  may,  on 
appeal,  re-district.  A  refusal  by  the  board  to  act  upon  a  petition  to  re-district,  is 
an  act  from  which  an  appeal  will  lie, 

In  September,  1866,  plaintiff  and  others  presented  to  defendaiits 
a  petition  tore-district  the  township;  and  a  motion  was  adopted  to 
"  re-district  the  township  as  they  thought  best  for  the  interests  of  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  41 


C.  D.  Flynn  v.  The  District  Township  of  Whitebreast. 

township  and  of  the  people."  At  a  special  meeting  held  in  No- 
vember to  carry  out  that  action,  the  former  motion  was  reconsidered, 
and  a  motion  adopted  to  let  the  boundaries  of  the  sub -districts 
remain  as  they  were  From  this  decision  of  the  township  board, 
plaintiff  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent  who  dismissed  the 
case  on  the  ground  that  the  board,  having  made  no  change  in  the 
sub-district  boundaries,  there  was  no  action  to  appeal  from,  the 
plaintiff  was  not  aggrieved,  and  hence  the  county  superintendent 
has  no  jurisdiction. 

Warren  £  Dungan,  for  appellant. 
Stuart  Brothers,  for  appellees. 

The  question  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  county    superintendent  in 
this  case,  is  the  only  one  which  requires  examination. 

The  counsel  for  appellees  confines  his  argument  to  two  points  : 

1.  "  The  county  superintendent  has  no  jurisdiction,  neither  orig- 
inal or  appellate,  over  the  question  of  fixing  or  changing  the  bound- 
ary lines  of  sub-districts." 

2.  "If  the 'county  superintendent   has  appellate  jurisdiction   to 
review  the  action  of  the  board  in  changing  or  fixing  said  boundary 
lines,  yet  he  could  not  exercise  it   in  this  case,  for  the  reason   that 
there  was  no  action  of  the  board  from  which  an  appeal  would  lie." 

The  first  point  is  based  on  section  31,  chapter  I,  of  the  school 
laws  now  in  force.  Preceding  sections  define  the  powers  of  the 
board  ;  but  said  section  31  contains  limitations  of  those  powers. 
One  of  the  limitations  is — "  nor  shall  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts 
be  changed  except  by  a  vote  of  a  majority  of  the  board."  This, 
when  taken  in  connection  with  the  context,  evidently  means,  merely, 
that  when  a  change  in  sub-district  boundaries  is  made  by  the  board, 
said  change  must  receive  the  sanction  of  a  majority  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  board  ;  and  is  not  intended  to  deny,  neither  does  it  deny, 
the  appellate  jurisdiction  of  county  superintendents  in  the  change  of 
sub-district  boundaries.  Of  course  it  is  not  true,  neither  is  it 
claimed  that  superintendents  have  original  jurisdiction  in  making 
such  change. 

In  the  discussion  of  the  second  point,  by  the  substitution  of  the 
word  "  action  "  for  the  terms  "  decision  or  order  "  used  in  the  law, 
and  ingeniously  attaching  to  that  word  a  signification  of  something 
done  beyond  the  mere  adoption  of  a  resolution,  such,  for  instance, 
as  the  actual  re-districting  of  the  township,  the  counsel  make  a  very 
plausible  argument,  in  which  it  is  clearly  seen  that  no  one  could  be 
aggrieved  by  an  act  when  no  act  was  done,  hence,  there  was  no 
ground  for  appeal. 

s6 


42  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


E.  Nichols  v.  C.  B.  Roberts,  County  Superintendent. 

But  the  language  of  the  law  is  that  "  any  person  aggrieved  by 
any  decision  or  order"  of  the  board  may  appeal.  Was  there  a 
4  decision  or  order"  made  by  the  board,  and  was  any  person  ag- 
grieved thereby  ?  It  appears  from  the  transcript  of  the  secretary, 
that  the  board  did  decide  to  "  let  the  sub-district  boundaries  remain 
as  they  were,"  and  passed  a  motion  or  "  order  "  to  that  effect.  The 
action  of  the  board  in  November,  though  virtually  merely  an  order 
of  refusal,  is  proper  ground  for  appeal,  provided  any  person  was 
aggrieved  thereby ;  and  in  this  decision  I  am  sustained  by  the  opin- 
ion of  the  attorney-general. 

It  only  remains  to  inquire  whether  any  person  might  have  been 
aggrieved  by  this  action  of  the  board.  The  affidavit  of  the  plain- 
tiff sets  forth  that  "  a  larger  number  of  sub-districts  and  school- 
houses  are  imperatively  demanded,  to  accommodate  the  children  of 
the  district  ;  "  and  in  the  hearing  before  the  county  superintendent, 
plaintiff  requested  an  opportunity  to  introduce  evidence  to  that 
effect. 

Facilities  for  the  education  of  children  are  among  the  most  highly 
cherished  privileges  enjoyed  by  intelligent  citizens  ;  and  it  may 
easily  be  conceived  that  persons  may  be  aggrived  by  a  refusal  to 
grant  such  facilities  as  are  "  imperatively  demanded.  " 

The  county  superintendent  erred  in  sustaining  the  motion  to  dis- 
miss ;  and  the  case  is  therefore  remanded  for  a  hearing  upon  its 
merits.  In  the  event  that  the  finding  shall  be  for  the  plaintiff,  the 
county  superintendent  may  himself  re-district  the  township  "  as 
justice,  equity,  and  the  interests  of  the  people  require." 

REVERSED, 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Inst motion. 

April  19,  1867. 


E.  NICHOLS,  Appellant,  v.  C.  B.  ROBERTS,  COUNTY  SUPERINTEND- 
ENT, et  al. 

Appeal  from  Bremer  County. 

SUB-DISTRICTS:  Can  be  formed  of  parts  of  different  townships  only  by  reason 
of  natural  obstacles. 

On  the  23d  day   of   January,  1867,  the   county  superintendent, 
with  the  consent  of  the   respective  boards  of   directors,  issued  an 


SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS.  43 


John  Clark  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wayne. 

order  creating  a  sub-district  from  sections  six  and  seven,  Leroy 
township,  and  sections  five  and  eight,  Sumner  township,  and 
attaching  the  same  to  the  township  of  Summer  for  school  purposes. 
From  this  action  appeal  is  made  to  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction. 

It  is  not  claimed  by  the  appellees  that  the  new  sub-district  was 
organized  un  account  of  the  existence  of  "  streams  or  other  natural 
obstacles,"  which  would  prevent  any  portion  of  the  inhabitants  of 
either  township  from  enjoying,  with  reasonable  facility,  the  advan- 
tages of  a  school  in  their  own  township.  On  the  other  hand, 
affidavits  submittc  d  by  appellants  set  forth,  that  there  are  "  no 
natural  obstacles,"  as  contemplated  in  section  25,  chapter  1,  school 
laws. 

The  sub-district  seems  to  have  been  formed  more  with  a  view 
to  promote  the  convenience  of  a  portion  of  the  people  of  the  pro- 
posed sub-district,  than  in  strict  compliance  with  law.  Section  one 
of  the  act  above  referred  to,  provides  that  each  civil  township  shall 
constitute  a  school-district.  There  is  no  law  permitting  the  formation 
of  a  sub-district  from  parts  of  two  or  more  townships,  except  as 
found  in  said  section  25,  to  which  reference  has  previously  been 
made;  and  as  it  appears  from  evidence  that  said  section  25  was  not 
applicable  in  this  particular  case,  the  action  of  the  county  superin- 
tendent was  illegal;  and  therefore  his  order  of  January  23d,  1867, 
creating  said  sub-district  is  hereby  REVERSED. 

D.  FKANKLIlSr  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
April  19th,  1867. 


JOHN  CLARK  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  WAYNE,  Appellant. 
Appeal  from  Jones  County. 

COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT:  Jurisdiction  of. — The  county  superintendent  is 
not  limited  to  a  reversal  or  affirmance  of  the  action  of  the  board,  but  he  deter- 
mines the  matter  brought  upon  appeal,  which  was  determined  by  the  board. 

On  the  17th  day  of  September,  A.  D.  1866,  John  Clark  and 
others  petitioned  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of 
Wayne,  to  change  the  sub-district  boundaries  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  transfer  him  with  forty  acres  of  land  on  which  he  resides  from 


44  SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


John  Clark  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wayne. 

sub-district  number  Four  to  sub-district  number  Five  in  the  same 
district  township.  The  board  refused  to  grant  the  petition;  where- 
upon the  said  Clark  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who 
reversed  the  decision  of  the  board  and  changed  the  sub-district 
boundaries  as  prayed  by  petitioners.  From  this  decision  of  the 
county  superintendent  an  appeal  is  taken  by  the  board  of  directors 
to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

John  McKean  for  appellee. 
No  appearance  for  appellant. 

The  affidavit  of  appellant  sets  forth  that,  subsequently  to  the  ren- 
dering of  the  decision  by  the  county  superintendent,  the  board  of 
directors  met  to  consider  the  case  and  unanimously  adopted  the  fol- 
lowing resolution : 

"  J&esolved,  That  we  believe  that  the  county  superintendent  has 
assumed  jurisdiction  over  a  case  that  the  law  gives  exclusively  to  the 
board;  and  we  further  believe  that  said  county  superintendent  has 
rendered  a  partial  decision  in  the  case  from  the  evidence  set  forth 
before  him." 

Does  the  board  mean  that  the  county  superintendent  had  no 
authority  to  entertain  Mr.  Clark's  appeal?  or,  that  the  county  super- 
intendent exceeded  his  authority  in  himself  changing  boundary  lines? 
If  the  former,  it  may  be  remarked  that  "  An  act  to  provide  for 
appeals,"  passed  December  24, 1859,  very  clearly  confers  this  power 
— a  power  which  has  been  confirmed  by  decision  of  our  supreme 
court.  If  reference  is  had  to  the  latter,  the  exception  is  still  not 
well  taken.  "  The  county  superintendent  is  not  limited  to  a  reversal 
or  affirmance  of  the  action  of  the  board,  but  he  determines  the  same 
which  it  had  determined." 

For  the  full  opinion  of  the  attorney-general  upon  this  point, 
reference  is  made  to  the  School  Journal  for  April,  1866,  and  also  to 
the  number  for  May,  1867;  and  to  his  opinion  thereon,  the  decisions 
of  this  department  have  conformed." 

We  have  carefully  examined  the  testimony  submitted  in  the 
hearing  before  the  county  superintendent,  but  we  fail  to  discover 
the  evidence  of  partiality  alleged  by  appellant.  It  is  seldom,  how- 
ever, that  decisions  give  entire  satisfaction  to  both  litigant  parties. 
It  is  not  their  nature. 

The  objections  urged  before  the  county  superintendent  against 
the  proposed  change  of  boundaries,  while  not  without  weight,  are, 
in  our  opinion,  overbalanced  by  the  advantages  of  the  change. 

While  we  do  not  favor  frequent  changes  of  sub-district  bounda- 
ries, as  the  county  superintendent  appears  to  have  given  this  case 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  .        45 

Whitefield  B.  Jones  v.  The  District  Township  of  Burlington. 

careful  investigation;  and  as  his  decision  promotes  the  interests 
of  a  portion  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  township,  and  at  the  same 
time  does  not  conflict  with  law,  justice,  or  equity,  his  decision  is 
hereby 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
May  31,  1867. 


WHITEFIELD  B.  JONES,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 

BURLINGTON. 

Appeal  from  DCS  Moines    County. 

JURISDICTION.  An  adjourned  meeting  of  the  board  may  do  what  a  previous 
one  might  have  done. 

This  is  a  case  relating  to  a  change  of  sub-district  boundaries. 

On  the  17th  clay  of  September,  1866,  the  board  of  directors  of 
the  district  township  of  Burlington,  held  its  regular  meeting  as 
required  by  law,  for  the  purpose  of  re-districting,  and  the  transac- 
tion of  other  business.  Without  completing  the  business  the 
board  adjourned  from  time  to  time,  and  on  December  1st,  [to  which 
day  the  board  previously  stood  adjourned],  voted  to  make  certain 
changes  by  which  some  of  the  boundary  lines  of  sub-districts  were 
changed,  and  a  portion  of  one  sub-district  was  transferred  to  the 
independent  district  of  Burlington.  The  board  then  adjourned  to 
meet  December  8th,  at  which  meeting  a  communication  was  re- 
ceived from  the  independent  district  of  Burlington  accepting  the 
proposition  to  transfer  territory  to  said  independent  district.  A  mo- 
tion was  also  adopted  rescinding  the  other  changes  in  sub-district 
boundaries  made  at  the  meeting  December  1st,  1866. 

From  this  last  action  of  the  board,  rescinding  change  of  sub-dis- 
trict boundaries,  W.  B.  Jones  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent, 
on  the  ground  that  the  meeting  of  said  December  8th,  was  not 
specially  called  to  change  sub-district  boundaries  as  provided  in 
section  29,  chapter  1,  school  laws  1866,  neither  was  it  a  meeting 
adjourned  from  the  regulur  meeting  of  September  17th,  1866; 
further  that  said  action  was  prejudicial  to  the  interests  and  conven- 
ience of  the  people.  The  county  superintendent  reljing  not  only 
upon  the  evidence  presented  but  also  upon  his  personal  knowledge 


46  SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


Whitefleld  B.  Jones  v.  The  District  Township  of  Burlington. 

of  the  facts  in  the  case,  sustained  the  action  of  the  board  of  direct- 
ors, and  from  his  decision  an  appeal  is  now  taken  to  the  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction. 

Let  us  briefly  examine  the  grounds  of  appeal.  It  is  true,  as 
appears  by  the  record,  that  said  meeting  of  December  8th,  was 
not  a  specially-called  meeting,  neither  it  is  so  claimed  by  the 
appellee.  If  the  case  depended  upon  this  point,  the  decision  would 
necessarily  be  given  in  favor  of  the  appellant.  But  the  record 
shows  clearly,  that  the  meeting  was  adjourned  from  December  1st 
to  December  8th,  even  in  opposition  to  the  wishes  of  appellant, 
and  that  the  meeting  of  December  8th,  was  in  fact  a  continuation 
of  the  meeting  of  September  17th,  as  that  of  December  1st  also 
was  to  which  appellant  does  not  object.  Said  meeting  of  Decem- 
ber 8th  was  not  only  legitimate  but  necessary  to  hear  the  report 
from  the  independent  district  of  Burlington,  for  the  boundaries 
between  a  township  district  and  an  independent  district  can  be 
changed  only  by  the  concurrent  action  of  the  respective  boards  of 
directors. 

It  is  a  well  established  principle  that  an  adjourned  meeting  may 
do  what  a  previous  meeting  might  have  done.  It  was  competent 
for  the  board  of  directors  at  the  adjourned  meeting  on  said 
December  8th,  to  make  further  changes  in  the  boundaries  of  sub- 
districts,  to  reconsider  the  action  of  December  1st,  or  to  rescind  a 
part  or  all  of  said  action  of  December  1st.  Their  action  of  Decem- 
ber 1st  did  not  preclude  [as  claimed  by  appellant]  the  taking  of 
further  action  December  8th. 

We  have  carefully  examined  the  eighty  pages  of  manuscript  sub- 
mitted in  this  case,  but  have  failed  to  discover  important  errors  in 
the  proceedings,  or  to  be  convinced  that  said  action  of  December 
8th,  1866,  was  prejudicial  to  the  interests  and  convenience  of  the 
people.  The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  therefore 
hereby 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FKANKLII*  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
June  21,  1867. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  47 

H.  H.  Draper  v.  The  District  Township  of  Lick  Creek.. 

H.  H.  DRAPER,    v.   THE    DISTRICT    TOWNSHIP    OF    LICK    CREEK. 

Appeal  from  Davis  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE  ;  Location  of.  lu  fixing  the  school-house  site,  the  geo- 
graphical position,  and  the  convenience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the 
sub-district  should  be  considered. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  board  ot  directors  of  the  district  township  of 
Lick  Creek,  Davis  County,  Iowa,  held  April  6th,  1867,  an  order 
was  made  locating  a  new  site  for  a  school-house  in  sub-district  num- 
ber Four,  south  of  main  Chequest  Creek,  and  ninety  rods  south  of 
the  geographical  center  of  the  sub-district.  From  this  order  of  the 
board  II.  H.  Draper  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  asking 
to  have  the  site  fixed -at  the  geographical  center  of  the  sub-district, 
After  a  full  hearing,  the  county  superintendent  virtually  sustained 
the  action  of  the  board,  by  establishing  a  new  site  eight  rods  further 
south.  Upon  this  decision  of  the  county  superintendent,  the  case 
comes  up  for  review  on  appeal  of  the  said  II.  H.  Draper. 

Amos  fSteckel,   for  appellant. 
M.  H.  Jones,  for  appellee. 

The  real  cause  of  the  controversy  is  the  flowing  through  the 
sub-district  of  two  creeks  which  in  times  of  high  water  are  impass- 
able for  children. 

The  law  provides  that  the  board  of  directors  "  shall  fix  the  site 
for  each  school-house,  taking  into  consideration  the  geographical 
position  and  convenience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the  sub- 
district." 

When  all  portions  of  a  sub-district  are  settled  with  uniform  dens- 
ity or  will  probably  be  so  settled  within  a  reasonable  period,  a  site 
at  or  near  the  geographical  center  would  manifestly  be  proper;  pro- 
vided, of  course,  that  such  site  is  conveniently  accessible  and 
appropriate  in  other  respects. 

In  this  case,  the  testimony  in  regard  to  the  character  and  suita- 
bleness of  the  proposed  site  at  the  center  is  conflicting ;  that  in 
reference  to  the  precise  location  made  by  the  board,  shows  that  it 
is  in  some  respects  objectionable;  while,  that  in  regard  to  the  location 
finally  indicated  by  the  county  superintendent  in  his  decision,  is 
uniform  and  favorable,  except  that  it  is  south  of  the  creek  and  at 
some  distance  from  the  center  of  the  sub-district.  The  evidence 
shows  that  a  majority  of  the  families,  and  a  still  larger  majority  of 


48  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


J.  D.  Williamson  v.  The  District  Township  of  Pleasant  Eidge. 

the  Children  live  in  the  south  half  of  the  sub-district,  and  a  majority 
of  the  children  are  also  found  south  of  the  creek  in  question. 

The  distance  of  the  location  selected  by  the  county  superin- 
tendent from  the  geographical  center — ninety-eight  rods — is  not 
so  great  as  to  work  serious  injustice.  Crossing  the  creeks  at  high 
water  is  appreciated  as  a  serious  difficulty  ;  but  it  is  temporary  in 
its  character  and  one  which  may  be  obviated  in  part,  at  least  by  the 
construction  of  additional  bridges. 

The  board  of  directors  and  the  county  superintendent  unite  in 
the  belief  that  the  public  convenience  will  be  best  promoted  by 
locating  the  site  south  of  main  Chequest ;  and  the  personal 
knowledge  which  these  parties  have  of  all  the  circumstances, 
entitles  their  judgment  to  respectful  consideration.  It  is  hoped 
tiiat  all  parties  will  cheerfully  acquiesce  in  the  opinion  of  the  county 
superintendent,  whose  decision  is  hereby 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

June  21,  1867. 


J.  D.    WILLIAMSON,  Appellant,  v.    THE    DISTRICT    TOWNSHIP    OF 

PLEASANT    HIDGE. 

Appeal  from  Lee  County. 

SuB-DiKECToR  ;  Not  to  be  appointed  in  new  districts. — When  new  sub  districts 
are  established  the  appointment  of  sub-directors  in  the  sub-districts  so  created  is 
illegal ;  as  such  change  does  not  take  effect  until  the  next  sub-district  election 
thereafter. 

In  September,  1866,  the  board  of  directors  of  Pleasant  Ridge 
district  township  formed  two  sub-districts  from  what  had  been  pre- 
viously known  as  sub-district  number  Two,  and  numbered  the  parts 
respectively  u  Two "  and  "  Eight,"  appointed  a  sub-director  for 
number  Two,  and  located  the  site  for  a  school-house  in  each  of  the 
new  sub-districts.  To  all  of  these  acts,  J.  D.  Williamson,  a  resident 
of  the  new  sub-district  number  Two,  took  exceptions  and  appealed 
the  county  superintendent,  claiming  personal  grievance  and  prpju- 
dice  to  public  interests  in  regard  to  the  manner  of  execution  of  the 
first  and  third  points,  and  the  violation  of  law  on  the  second 
point. 

John    Van   Valkensburg  for  appellant. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  49 


J.  F.  Stontenbaugh  v.  The  District  Township  of  Spring  Creek 

In  the  hearing  before  the  county  superintendent,  it  was  satisfacto- 
rily shown  that  it  was  necessary  to  include  the  said  J.  1).  Wil- 
liamson in  the  new  sub-district  number  Two,  to  prevent  too  great 
a  disproportion  in  the  amount  of  taxable  property  in  the  re- 
spective sub-districts,  as  each  would  be  required  to  build  a  new 
school-house.  It  was  also  shown  by  the  said  Williamson's  own 
testimony,  that  his  tax  in  sub-district  number  Two  would  be  less 
than  in  sub-district  number  Eight,  and  that  the  distance  from  the 
residence  of  the  said  Williamson  to  the  proposed  school-house  site 
in  r.umber  Two  is  only  about  one-half  as  great  as  to  the  site  for  the 
school-house  in  number  Eight.  It  was  in  evidence  that  the  school- 
house  sites  in  both  sub-districts  are  located  very  nearly  in  the 
geogiaphical  centers  of  the  sub-districts  respectively.  The  appel- 
lant failed  entirely  to  show  that  a  more  central  location  would  pro- 
mote either  public  or  private  convenience  and  interest.  With 
these  facts  before  him,  the  county  superintendent  very  properly 
decided  to  sustain  the  action  of  the  board  in  its  location  of  the 
boundary  line  between  the  sub-districts,  as  well  as  in  fixing  the 
school-house  sites. 

Section  29,  chapter  1,  school  laws  of  1866,  provides  that  altera- 
tions made  in  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts  shall  not  take  effect 
until  the  next  sub-district  election  thereafter;  hence  the  appoint- 
ment by  the  board  of  directors  in  September,  of  a  sub-director  for 
the  new  sub-district  was  illegal,  as  was  decided  by  the  county 
superintendent. 

The  ruling  of  the  county  superintendent  on  all  the  points  raised 
by  the  appellant  is  approved;  and  his  decision  is  hereby 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FKAKKL1N  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

July  2,  1867. 


J.  F.   STONTENBAUGH,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF 

SPRING  CREEK. 

Appeal  from  Tama  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE  ;  Location  of.  In  determining  the  location  of  the  school- 
house  site,  the  geographical  position,  and  the  convenience  of  the  pe  >pie  of  each 
portion  of  the  sub-district  should  be  considered.  ' 

January  15,  1867,  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township 
of  Spring  Creek,  at  a  special  meeting,  fixed  the  site  for  a  school- 

s7 


50  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


George  W.  Kelsall  v.  The  District  Township  of  Brandon. 

house  in  sub-district  number  Three,  locating  it  in  the  most  south- 
eastern of  the  nine  sections  comprising  the  sub-district.  -From 
tbis  action,  J.  F.  Stontenbaugh,  residing  in  the  northern  part  of  the 
sub-district,  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  upon 
the  final  hearing,  removed  the  site  some  distance  north,  but  to  a 
position  still  south  and  east  of  the  geographical  center.  From  this 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent,  J.  G.  Hill,  residing  in  the 
south-eastern  part  of  the  sub-district,  appeals  to  the  superintendent 
of  public  instruction. 

The  testimony  adduced  in  the  examination  before  the  county 
superintendent,  shows  that  the  site  selected  by  him,  as  compared 
with  the  one  fixed  by  the  board,  is  nearer  the  greographical  center 
of  the  sub-district,  is  nearer  the  present  and  prospective  center  of 
population  in  the  sub-district,  and  is  also  nearer  the  center  of  the 
children  of  school  age. 

Believing  from  all  the  facts  in  evidence  that  in  determining  this 
case  the  county  superintendent  exercised  a  sound  discretion,  and 
acted  with  a  due  regard  to  the  interests  of  the  whole  sub-district, 
making  a  personal  examination  of  the  location  in  question,  and  ful- 
filling the  law  in  letter  and  spirit,  his  decision  is  hereby 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FKANKLIX  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  2,  1867. 


GEORGE  "W.   KELSALL,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TUWNSHLP  OF 

BRANDON. 

Appeal  from  Jackson  County. 

\.  SCHOOL-HOUSE  TAX.  Certification  of  to  district  township  meeting^.  The  pre- 
sentation of  the,  sub-district  records,  in  which  is  embodied  the  certificate  of  the 
sum  determined  ;  and  the  notification  of  the  secretary  and  president  thereof,  is 
one  which  meets  every  legal  requirement. 

2.  FUND.  Teachers'.  Electors  at  the  district  township  meeting  cannot  legally 
vote  to  make  each  sub-district  independent  in  refererce  to  teachers'  fund. 

At  the  annual  meeting  of  the  electors  of  sub-district  number 
Seven,  Bandon  township,  in  said  county,  held  March  2d,  1867,  a 
vote  was  passed  calling  on  Brandon  township  for  $1,000  to  build  a 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  51 


George  W.  Kelsall  v.  The  District  Township  of  Brandon. 

school-house  in  sub-district  number  Seven.  This  vote  was  em- 
bodied in  a  certificate  as  required  by  law,  and  recorded  in  the 
minutes  of  the  meeting  in  the  sub-district  book.  Said  book  with 
certificate  indorsed  therein,  was  carried  to  the  annual  district 
township  meeting,  held  March  9th,  1867,  and  placed  on  the  table 
before  the  secretary,  and  the  attention  of  the  president  arid  secre- 
tary was  called  to  the  fact  that  it  was  the  record  book  of  sub-district 
number  Seven,  and  that  it  contained  the  certificate  of  the  sub- 
district  vote  calling  for  $1,000  to  build  a  new  house.  During  the 
progress  of  the  meeting,  the  president  was  requested  to  bring  the 
subject  to  the  attention  of  the  electors,  which  he  expressed  a 
willingness  to  do  at  the  proper  time.  After  sub-division  four  of 
section  7,  chapter  1,  of  the  school  law,  had  beeen  acted  upon,  a 
motion  to  make  each  sub-district  independent  in  reference  to  school- 
house  fund  and  teachers'  fund,  was  adopted ;  when  a  motion  was 
made  and  seconded  to  adjourn,  and  the  meeting  broke  up.  When 
the  motion  to  adjourn  was  made,  it  was  objected  to  by  the 
president  on  the  ground  that  the  fifth  sub-division  of  section  7,  and 
the  resolution  passed  by  sub-district  number  Seven,  had  not  yet 
been  acted  upon  ;  but  the  motion  to  adjourn  was  insisted  upon,  and 
no  further  action  was  taken. 

Afterwards,  March  18th,  1867,  at  the  regular  meeting  of  the 
board  of  directors  of  Brandon  township,  the  said  certificate  of  the 
vote  in  sub-district  number  Seven,  was  presented,  and  by  unanimous 
vote  laid  upon  the  table. 

From  this  action  of  the  board,  the  plaintiff  appealed,  and  in  his 
affidavit  to  the  county  superintendent  inaugurating  these  proceed- 
ings, alleged  errors  on  the  part  of  the  board,  as  follows: 

1.  "  Said  board  erred  in  laying  said  application  on  the  table. 

2.  "  Said  board  erred  in  neglecting  to  provide  means  for  build- 
ing a  new  school-house  in  said  sub-district. 

3.  "  Said  board  erred  in  that  they  did  not,  on  filing  said  applica- 
tion, vote  a  tax  on  the  district  township  of  Brandon,  in  the  sum  of 
one  thousand  dollars,  for  the  purpose  of   building  a  new  school- 
house  in  said  sub-district  number  Seven." 

That  the  points  at  issue  may  be  more  clearly  defined,  we  quote 
the  material  part  of  the  county  superintendent's  decision:  u  The 
board  of  directors  had  no  jurisdiction  to  vote  an  appropriation  for 
a  school-house,  either  on  the  township  at  large  or  on  sub-district 
number  Seven,  unless  the  certificate  of  the  sub-district  was  pre- 
sented to  the  district  to\vnship  meeting  held  March  9th,  and  that 
meeting  neglected  or  refused  to  vote  such,  or  some  appropriation. 
From  all  the  testimony  in  the  case,  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the 
certificate  was  not  so  pn  sented ;  that  the  failure  to  act  on  it  by  the 


52  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


George  W.  Kelsall  v.  The  District  Township  of  Brandon. 


meeting  constituted  either  negligence  or  refusal.  It 

is  considered  therefore  that  the  board  of  directors  did  not  err  in 
laying  the  application  of  sub-district  number  Seven  on  the  table, 
and  their  action  is  affirmed." 

As  the  whole  question  is  thus  made  to  depend  upon  the  suffici- 
ency of  the  certification  of  the  action  of  the  sub-district  meeting  to 
the  district  township  meeting,  it  becomes  pertinent  to  inquire  how 
the  certification  may  be  made. 

The  law  sa}S  merely,  section  11:  "And  the  sub-director  shall 
certify  the  same  to  the  next  regular  meeting  of  the  electors  of  the 
district  township  held  thereafter."  JSTo  particular  method  of  doing 
this  is  defined.  If  during  the  progress  of  the  meeting  the  sub- 
director  were  to  make  a  public  announcement  of  the  action  of  the 
sub-district  electors,  and  present  his  certificate,  this  would  be 
sufficient.  So  also,  if  the  sub-director  were  to  include  the  cer- 
tificate in  a  written  communication  to  the  president  of  the  district 
township  meeting,  this  would  fulfil  the  requirements  of  the  law; 
or,  if  such  commun  cation  were  presented  to  the  secretary,  it  would 
be  in  accordance  with  the  intent  of  number  seven  of  blank  forms. 
The  presentation  of  the  sub-district  records  to  the  secretary  of  the 
township  meeting,  and  the  notification  to  the  president  and  the 
secretary  that  was  made,  as  shown  by  the  evidence,  we  deem  to  be 
a  just  and  proper  certification,  ar*d  one  that  meets  every  legal 
requirement.  That  the  president  failed  to  make  a  formal  presenta- 
tion of  the  certificate  to  the  electors,  was  not  the  fault  of  the  sub- 
district,  and  was  probably  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  meeting  ad- 
journed in  opposition  to  the  advice  of  the  president,  before  that 
order  of  business  was  reached. 

We  are  therefore  compelled  to  overrule  the  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent,  and  to  sustain  the  first  at  d  second  specifications  in 
the  plaintiff's  assignment  of  error. 

The  third  specification  will  be  disposed  of  briefly.  Sections,  twelve 
and  Iwenty-e  ght  declare  that  the  school-house  tax  "shall  be  appor- 
tioned among  the  several  sub-districts,  as  justice  and  equity  may  re- 
quire." As  it  has  not  been  the  uniform  practice  in  Brandon  township 
for  each  sub-district  to  build  its  own  school-house,  [for  this  fact  is  stated 
by  the  county  superintendent,  ar.d  implied  in  the  testimony],  it  is 
not  competent,  now,  for  the  electors,  nor  for  the  board,  to  require  any 
sub-district  to  build  its  own  house.  It  is  also  contemplated  by  sec- 
tion twenty-nine,  that  the  "teachers'  fund"  and  the  "contingent 
fund"  shall  be  assessed  uniformly  upon  the  whole  township,  except 
as  otherwise  provided  in  the  latter  part  of  said  section.  The  action 
of  the  township  electors,  therefore,  in  voting  that  the  sub-districts 
should  be  independent  in  reference  to  "  school-house  fund "  and 
"  teachers'  fund,"  was  without  warrant  of  law  and  void. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  53 


David  Ockerman  v.  The  District  Township  of  Hamilton. 

The  board  of  directors  further  erred  in  that  it  did  not  apportion  a 
school-house  tax  of  one  thousand  dollars  among  the  several  sub- 
districts  of  Brandon  township  as  justice  and  equity  require,  taking  as 
the  basis  of  said  apportionment  the  respective  amounts  previously 
levied  upon  said  sub-districts  for  school-house  purposes,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  building  a  school-house  in  iaid  sub-district  number  Seven. 

REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  15,  1867. 


DAVID  OOKEKMAN  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  HAMILTON. 
Appeal  from  Decatur  County. 

CONTESTED  ELECTION.  SUB-DIRECTOR  :  The  right  to  hold  and  exereise  the 
office  of  sub-director,  in  case  of  contest,  must  ba  determined  by  the  district  court, 
under  an  information  in  the  nature  of  quo  warranto. 

The  above  entitled  case  is  interesting  on  account  of  its  involving 
issues  not  heretofore  determined  in  the  administration  of  the  school 
law. 

It  appears  from  the  record  that  the  annual  meeting  of  the  electors 
of  sub-district  number  Two,  Hamilton  township,  Decatur  county, 
held  March  2,  1867,  the  two  candidates  for  sub-district  honors — 
David  Ockerman  and  Alonzo  Work — received  an  equal  number  of 
votes.  One  person  voted  who,  it  is  alleged,  had  been  a  resident  of 
the  state  less  than  six  full  months,  but  the  evidence  does  not  show 
for  which  candidate  his  vote  was  cast.  The  polls  closed  at  about 
three  o'clock  p.  M.,  and  immediately  thereafter  a  Mr.  Whitaker 
appeared  and  offered  his  vote  for  Mr.  Ockerman,  but  the  polls  were 
closed  and  the  vote  was  rejected.  The  evidence  does  not  show  that 
Mr.  Whitaker  was  an  elector  of  said  sub-district,  though  the  presump- 
tion is  that  he  was  such  an  elector. 

The  plaintiff,  Ockerman,  knowing  that  the  polls  had  been  closed 
before  the  hour  provided  by  law,  and  that  Mr.  Whitaker' s  vote  for 
him  had  been  rejected,  and  believing  that  an  illegal  vote  had  been 
cast  against  himj  qualified  as  sub-director  within  ten  days,  and  at 
the  regular  meeting  of  the  board,  in  March,  claimed  a  seat  as  a 
member  of  the  board  from  sub-district  number  Two.  The  claim 
of  said  Ockerman  was  referred  to  the  chairman  of  the  meeting,  who 


54  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


David  Ockerraan  v.  The  District  Township  of  Hamilton* 


decided  that  the  board  had  no  jurisdiction  in  the  case;  and  in  this 
decision  he  was  sustained  by  the  board.  "W".  S.  Warnock,  the  sub- 
director  for  the  previous  year,  was  recognized  as  holding  over,  and 
was  elected  president  of  the  board. 

From  this  decision  of  the  board  the  plaintiff  appealed  to  the 
county  superintendent,  who  reversed  the  decision  of  the  board,  and 
directed  that  the  said  Ockerman  be  admitted  as  a  member  of  the 
board,  and  that  the  said  board  proceed  immediately  to  appoint  a  new 
president  from  their  number. 

The  county  superintendent  does  not  elaborate  his  opinion,  hence 
we  are  left  to  conjecture  what  were  the  reasons  which  influenced 
his  decision.  From  said  decision  W.  S.  Warnock  appeals,  and  thus 
the  case  comes  before  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  for 
revision. 

The  hearing  before  the  county  superintendent  was  ex'parte.  The 
notice  of  the  hearing  was  mailed  to  the  parties  at  Pleasant  Plains, 
while  it  appears  that  the  address  of  the  said  Warnock  is  Nine  Eagles. 
The  appellant  alleges  in  said  affidavit  that  he  failed  to  receive  notice 
of  the  time  of  hearing.  The  appellant  makes  several  exceptions  to 
the  ruling  and  decision  of  the  county  superintendent,  the  most  of 
which  are  well  taken. 

If  our  views  of  the  remedy  to  be  sought  in  this  case  corresponded 
with  those  evidently  entertained  by  all  connected  with  it,  we  should 
be  disposed  to  specify  the  errors  and  remand  the  case  for  rehearing 
before  the  county  superintendent.  But,  in  our  opinion  the  proper 
remedy  has  not  been  employed. 

Alleged  illegal  votes  were  cast.  The  right  to  vote  and  the  right 
to  hold  office  are  among  the  most  highly  cherished  franchises  of  the 
privileged  class  of  American  citizens.  They  are  rights  that  will  be 
relinquished  only  upon  the  finding  of  a  competent  tribunal.  The 
federal  constitution  gives  Congress  authority  to  determine  in  regard 
to  the  election  return,  and  qualification  of  its  own  members.  So  our 
state  constitution  confers  a  similar  power  upon  the  two  branches  of 
our  general  assembly.  But  the  law  nowhere  gives  the  board  of 
directors  of  a  school  district  such  authority.  The  power  does  not 
exist.  "  Corporations  have  only  such  powers  as  are  specifically 
granted  by  the  act  of  incorporation,  or  as  are  necessary  for  the  pur- 
pose to  carry  into  effect  the  powers  expressly  granted,  and  have  no 
others"  [2  Kent.  Com.  399] ;  u  and  the  powers  are  strictly  con- 
strued "  [Clark  v.  The  City  of  Des  Moines,  19  Iowa,  212]. 

At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors,  March  18th,  no 
one  presented  a  certificate  or  other  evidence  of  election  as  director 
from  sub-district  number  Two ;  and  as  it  appeared  that  there  was  no 
election,  the  board  properly  recognized  the  former  incum.  ent  as 
holding  over.  The  right  of  the  appellant  to  occupy  the  office  of 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS  55 


David  Ockerman  v.  The  District  Township  of  Hamilton. 

sub-director  was  disputed  and  claimed  by  said  Ockerman.  Appel- 
lant's right  to  a  seat  in  the  board  is  based  on  the  assumption  of  no 
election.  To  determine  the  question  of  election,  would  require  the 
administering  of  oaths,  the  examination  of  witnesses,  the  deter- 
mining of  the  right  of  parties  to  vote, — a  judicial  proceeding  which 
the  board  of  school  directors  is  unauthorized  to  make. 

Over  the  right  of  a  party  to  exercise  the  functions  of  the  office  of 
sub-director  in  any  school  district  the  county  superintendant  has 
neither  original  nor  appellate  jurisdiction. 

It  is  pertinent  then  to  inquire  what  is  the  proper  method  to  pursue 
in  the  case  of  a  contested  school  election,  or  in  case  two  or  more 
parties  claim  the  same  office.  u  The  law  solicitous  to  furnish  a 
remedy  for  the  invasion  ot  legal  right  has  provided  that  of  quo  war- 
ranto,  or  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto,  to  deter- 
mine the  title  of  an  officer  to  his  office  and  to  determine  the  right  of 
any  person  or  incorporation  to  exercise  a  public  franchise." 
It  is  perfectly  well  settled  that  questions  of  this  character  can  not 
be  tried  and  determined  in  any  collateral  or  indirect  proceeding. 
Cochran  v.  McCleary,  Iowa  supreme  court,  June  term,  1867.  Our 
statutes  provide  that  an  information  may  be  filed  against  any  person 
unlawfully  holding  or  exercising  any  public  office  or  franchise  within 
this  srate,  or  any  office,  in  any  corporation  created  by  the  laws  of 
this  state.  Section  3732,  Revision  1860.  Also  that  when  several 
persons  claim  to  be  entitled  to  the  same  office  or  franchise,  an  infor- 
mation may  be  filed  against  all  or  any  portion  thereof  in  order  to  try 
their  repective  rights  thereto.  Section  3743.  From  an  extensive 
examination  of  cases,  we  are  satisfied  that  an  informatisn  in  the 
nature  of  quo  warranto  is  the  only  proper  method  of  testing  the 
right  of  a  person  to  hold  an  office  or  to  exercise  any  public  fran- 
chise. 

Question  may  arise  in  the  mind  of  some  whether  information  in 
the  nature  of  quo  warranto  may  not  be  filed  with  the  county  super- 
intendent, and  the  case  determined  by  him. 

Omitting  other  reasons,  the  question  is  sufficiently  answered  by 
the  statute,  which  requirt-s  that  u  such  statement  shall  be  filed  in  the 
clerk's  office  and  notice  issued  arid  served  in  the  same  manner  as 
hereinbefore  provided  for  the  commencement  of  actions  in  the  dis- 
trict court."  Section  3737. 

Held,  that  the  county  superintendent  erred  in  assuming  jurisdic- 
tion of  th-'s  case  which  should  have  been  brought  in  the  district 
court,  and  his  decision  is  therefore  REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  24,  1867. 


56  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Maria  L.  Dougherty  v.  L.  D.  Tracy,  County  Superintendent. 

MARIA  L.  DOUGHERTY  v.   L.   D.  TRACY,  County  Superintendent. 
Appeal  from  Grundy  County. 

REVOCATION  OF  TEACHER'S  CERTIFICATE  :  Manner  of  conducting  appeal  from 
action  of  county  superintendent. 

The  order  of  a  county  superintendent  revoking  a  certificate  will  not  be  inter- 
fered with  on  appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  unless  it  appears, 
that  he  acted  from  passion  or  prejudice. 

April  1st,  1867,  L.  D.  Tracy,  superintendent  of  common  schools 
for  the  county  of  Grundy,  revoked  the  certificate  of  Maria  L. 
Dougherty,  a  teacher  in  said  county,  on  the  alleged  ground  of  incom- 
petency  to  properly  govern  and  control  a  school.  A  notice  of  tho 
revocation,  made  out  in  due  form,  was  served  upon  the  secretaries  of 
the  several  district  townships;  but  no  notice  of  the  revocation  was 
served  by  the  superintendent  on  the  plaintiff. 

The  plaintiff  appealed  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction, 
who  by  circular  of  May  15th,  1867,  directed  that  the  case  should  be 
heard  by  the  county  superintendent.  Such  hearing  took  place  June 
7th,  1867.  During  the  examination  twenty-three  persons,  patrons 
and  pupils,  testified  to  the  good  order  of  the  school,  and  the  general 
good  character  and  reputation  of  the  plaintiff  as  a  teacher.  Four- 
teen persons  make  affidavit  that  they  believe  plaintiff 's  certificate 
was  revoked  from  personal  prejudice. 

One  witness,  called  by  the  defense,  testified  that  the  school  was 
not  as  well  governed  as  it  might  have  been ;  that  he  several  times 
heard  cursing  and  swearing  on  the  school  grounds  at  noon  and 
recess  Three  persons  testified  that  they  did  not  believe  the 
superintendent  revoked  plaintiff's  certificate  from  prejudice  or 
passion.  Nineteen  persons  certified  that  they  believe  Mr.  Tracy 
to  be  a  competent  and  impartial  officer,  and  free  from  any  malicious 
administration. 

The  county  superintendent,  disregarding  the  weight  of  evidence 
in  regard  to  the  plaintiff's  qualifications,  affirmed  his  previous  de- 
cision revoking  plaintiff's  certificate,  and  certified  that  the  act  was 
done  without  prejudice  or  passion  toward  the  plaintiff,  and  that  he 
was  impelled  to  that  course  by  conviction,  which  was  the  result  of 
personal  observation  and  knowledge,  that  plaintiff  was  incompetent 
to  govern  a  school  properly. 

From  that  decision  the  plaintiff  appeals. 

If  this  case  could  be  determined  by  the  weight  of  evidence  in 
rtgard  to  the  plaintiff's  ability  to  govern  a  school  properly,  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  57 


Maria  L.  Dougherty  v.  L.  D.  Tracy,  County  Superintendent. 

decision  would  be  in  plaintiff's  favor.  But  there  are  other  ele- 
ments for  consideration.  The  county  superintendent  is  clothed 
with  large  discretionary  powers.  So  great  has  this  discretion  been 
regarded,  that  it  has  been  held  by  previous  incumbents  of  the 
office  of  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  that  the  refusal  to 
grant  a  teacher's  certificate  or  the  revocation  of  such  certificate  by 
a  county  superintendent  was  an  act  so  wholly  discretionary  that  it 
was  not  subject  to  revision.  The  circular  of  May  15th,  1867,  from 
this  department,  maintaining  the  right  of  appeal  in  such  cases, 
was  not  intended  to  curtail  the  discretionary  power  of  county 
superintendents,  but  to  point  out  a  way  in  which  its  abuse  might  be 
corrected. 

In  the  absence  of  special  statutory  provisions  in  regard  to  the 
manner  of  hearing  appeals,  it  is  presumed  that  general  principles 
are  applicable. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  at  this  time  to  enunciate  some  general 
principles  which  will  be  observed  in  the  adjudication  of  this  and 
similar  cases. 

I.  The  discretion  of  a  county  superintendent  of  refusing  or 
revoking  a  teacher's  certificate  will  not  be  interfered  with  by  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction  unless  it  is  clearly  shown  that 
the  county  superintendent  in  such  act  violated  the  law  in  letter  or 
spirit,  or  was  influenced  by  passion  or  prejudice.  This  position  is 
believed  to  be  correct  in  the  light  of  both  principle  and  public 
policy.  The  general  rule  is,  "  the  supreme  court  will  not  interfere 
with  the  decisions  of  the  district  court  in  cases  where  the  latter 
has  a  discretionary  power,  unless  it  is  fully  apparent  that  such 
power  has  been  abused."  Hammond's  Iowa  Digest,  p.  65. 
Numerous  cases  might  be  cited  in  support  of  this  rule,  but  such 
citations  are  deemed  unnecessary.  The  county  superintendent  is 
presumed  to  be  selected  from  among  his  fellow-citizens  on  account 
of  his  ability  to  exercise  a  sound  discretion  in  the  discharge  of  the 
important  duties  of  his  office.  He  is  bound  by  a  solemn  oath  to 
discharge  his  trusts  with  fidelity.  He  is  on  the  ground  and  has  a 
personal  knowledge  of  circumstances.  He  can  judge  of  the 
educational  requirements,  of  his  county,  better  than  another  person 
scores  of  miles  distant.  In  his  examination  of  teachers  and  in  his 
visits  to  their  schools,  he  can  judge  of  the  teacher's  comparative 
and  actual  merit  and  ability,  better  than  those  who  have  less 
extended  opportunities  for  observation.  He  is  responsible  to  his 
constituents  for  the  manner  in  wThich  his  duties  are  performed. 
His  official  acts  may  be  reviewed  and  modified  or  annulled  by  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction.  Frequent  interference  with 
the  discretion  of  county  superintendents  would  tend  to  bring 


58  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Maria  L.  Dougherty  v.  L.  D.  Tracy,  County  Superintendent. 

their  authority  into  contempt,  and  to  unsettle  the  foundations  of  our 
school  system.  While,  then,  the  right  to  review  an  abuse  of  discre- 
tion is  reserved,  and  the  right  to  reverse  an  illegal  decision,  main- 
tained, the  discretion  of  county  superintendents  will  not  be  inter- 
fered with,  unless  such  interference  is  necessary  to  secure  justice  or 
vindicate  law 

II.  The  proof  of  the  violation  of  law,  or  of  the  influence  of  pas- 
sion or  prejudice  in  the  performance  of  official  duty  must  be  clear 
and  convincing.  Mere  opinion,  unsupported  by  facts,  is  insufficient 
to  establish  the  allegation  of  passion  or  prejudice.  "  As  a  general 
rule,  witnesses,  unless  experts,  should  state  facts  not  opinions"  Whit- 
mor  <&  Bowman,  4  Greene,  Iowa,  148.  "  Except  when  given  by 
experts,  evidence  of  mere  opinion  is  not  competent,  unless  upon 
some  controlling  ground  of  necessity,  resulting  from  the  nature  of 
the  inquiry."  jDalzell  v.  The  City  of  Davenport,  12  Iowa,  437; 
Danforth,  Dennis  &  Co.  v.  Carter  &  May,  4  Iowa,  230. 

In  the  light  of  these  principles  which  are  believed  to  be  correct 
and  proper,  conclusions  may  be  readily  formed. 

It  is  held  that  it  is  not  necessary  for  the  county  superintendent  to 
notify  the  plaintiff  of  his  intention  to  revoke  her  certificate  before 
taking  such  action ;  neither  does  the  law  require  him  to  serve  a  copy  of 
the  revocation  upon  the  plaintiff,  subsequently.  Courtesy  and  pro- 
priety, however,  would  dictate  that  the  teacher  should  receive 
immediate  notice  of  the  revocation  from  the  county  superintendent. 

The  rulings  of  the  county  superintendent  on  the  admission  of 
evidence  have  no  material  effect  on  the  final  decision  of  the  case, 
hence  the  exceptions  of  the  plaintiff  thereto  are  passed  over. 

The  revocation  of  a  teacher's  certificate  is  adjudged  to  be  an  act 
of  discretion  on  the  part  of  the  county  superintendent,  which  will 
not  be  interfered  with,  without  satisfactory  proof  of  illegality  or  of  prej- 
udice. In  this  case,  while  the  weight  of  testimony  is  favorable  to 
plaintiff's  qualifications,  and  opinion  is  conflicting  in  regard  to  preju- 
dice, there  is  not  a  single  fact  adduced  in  the  testimony  upon  which 
the  theory  of  prejudice  can  be  based.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
county  superintendent  headed  a  subscription  to  pay  plaintiff's  board, 
and  was  the  first  to  pay  said  subscription ;  during  the  term  he  told 
the  sub-director  that  the  plaintiff  must  be  sustained  in  her  govern- 
ment of  the  school  at  all  hazards;  and  these  facts  indicate  the 
absence  of  prejudice.  The  mere  opinion  of  witnesses,  unsupported 
by  facts,  can  not  be  received  as  satisfactory  evidence  of  prejudice. 

Some  embarrassment  is  experienced  in  this  case  from  the  circum- 
stance that  the  plaintiff  belongs  to  that  gentler  sex  to  which  we  are 
all  educated  to  do  homage,  and  the  idea  is  largely  prevalent  that 
they  are  not  amenable  to  law  in  an  equal  degree  with  the  opposite 
sex;  but  having  a  high  regard  for  the  rights  of  women,  we  dare  not 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  59 


Levi  Towns,  v.  The  Independent  District  of  Buckeye. 


pervert  law  even  to  shield  them  from  its  operation.     We  are  there- 
fore compelled  to  affirm  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent. 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
October  1,  1867, 


LEVI  TOWNS,  Appellant,  v.  THE  INDEPENDENT  DISTRICT  OF  BUCKEYE. 
Appeal  from  Mafiaska  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE  :  Location  of  by  board. — The  b  ^ard  «honM  be  sustained 
in  the  location  of  a  school-house  site,  when  upon  examination  the  site  is  found 
to  be  established  in  accordance  with  law  and  equity. 

June  8th,  1867,  the  board  of  directors  of  the  independent  school 
district  of  Buckeye,  Mahaska  county,  determined  the  location  of  a 
school-house  for  said  district.  From  this  action  of  the  board,  Levi 
Towns  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who  after  a  full  hear- 
ing of  the  case  and  a  personal  "  examination  of  the  entire  territory," 
decided  the  "  the  site  for  the  school-house  in  the  said  independent 
district  of  Buckeye  was  established  in  accordance  with  law  and 
equity." 

Lacy  <&  Sheperd,  for  appellant. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 

The  law  in  reference  to  the  location  of  school-houses  is  so  plain, 
and  the  opinion  of  the  state  superintendent  has  been  so  frequently 
given  in  published  decisions,  that  it  seems  unnecessary  to  repeat. 

While  it  is  shown  that  the  timber  land  in  the  north  part  of  the 
district  is  susceptible  of  cultivation,  it  appears  probable  from  the 
evidence  that  it  will  not  be  improved  and  settled,  at  least  for  many 
years  to  come.  Leaving  the  timber  land  out  of  consideration,  the 
proposed  site  is  not  so  far  from  the  geographical  center  nor  the 
center  of  population  as  to  do  serious  injustice  to  any  on  that 
account.  Even  the  appellant  admits  in  his  testimony  that  he  is 
not  aggrieved  by  the  distance.  The  distance  between  the  proposed 
site  and  the  one  desired  by  the  appellant  is  small — only  forty 
rods. 


60  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


William  O.  Price  v.  The  District  Township  of  State  Center. 

Taxation  and  cost  of  school -house,  in  the  form  in  which  they  are 
presented  in  this  case,  are  subjects  over  which  the  superintendent 
has  no  control. 

After  a  careful  review  of  all  the  evidence  submitted,  and  the 
able  argument  of  counsel,  there  is  not  found  sufficient  reason  for 
reversing  the  decision  heretofore  made ;  and  the  action  of  the  board 
in  establishing  a  site  for  a  school-house  in  said  district,  and  the 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent  relating  thereto,  is  hereby 

AFFIRMED. 

I).  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
October  17.  1867. 


WILLIAM  O.  PRICE  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  STATE  CENTER. 
Appeal  from  Marshall  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE.  While  the  probabilities  of  the  future  should  not  be 
ignored,  the  neccssi  ies  of  the  present  must  be  observed  in  locating  school-house 
sites. 

Sub-district  number  Two  of  the  district  township  of  State  Center, 
Marshall  county,  previous  to  1866,  was  a  sub-district  in  another 
district  township,  and  as  such  had  a  school-house  site  located 
at  the  geographical  center  of  the  sub-district.  April  9th,  1867, 
the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of  Stare  Center 
re-located  said  site,  putting  it  one  mile  west  of  the  geographical 
center,  on  the  alleged  ground  of  inability  to  procure  the  necessary 
amount  of  land  at  the  original  location;  also  that  the  new  site 
would  accommodate  a  greater  number,  and  answer  for  all ;  and 
lastly  that  the  sub-district  might  eventually  be  divided,  when  the 
new  site  would  be  convenient  tor  one  of  the  sub-districts  which 
might  possibly  be  formed.  The  new  location  was  one-half  mile 
from  the  western  boundary  of  the  sub-district,  which  is  three  miles 
wide  and  three  and  one-half  miles  long. 

From  this  action  of  the  board,  William  O.  Price  appealed  to 
the  county  superintendent,  by  whom  a  new  site  was  conditionally 
located  one-half  mile  west  of  the  original  site,  or  midway  between 
the  two  former  sites  ;  and  in  case  the  requisite  amount  of  land 
could  not  be  obtained,  the  original  location  was  to  be  re-estab- 
lished. From  this  decision  by  the  county  superintendent  the  said 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


William  O.  Price  v.  The  District  Township  of  State  Center. 


district  township  takes  appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction. 

Bradley  &  Caswell  for  appellant. 
Henderson  d;  Binford  for  appellee. 

The  causes  for  the  re-location  do  not  seem  to  be  well  founded, 
as  the  evidence  shows  that  a  party  offered  to  donate  three-fourths 
of  an  acre  at  the  geographical  center  for  a  site,  and  subsequantly 
made  a  deed  to  the  district  therefor.  While  ample  school  grounds 
are  desirable,  and  even  necessary  for  the  best  interests  of  the 
school,  three-fourths  of  an  acre  would  ordinarily  be  considered 
sufficient  for  the  necessities  of  a  school  in  a  rural  district.  Further, 
the  donation  of  three-fourths  of  an  acre  would  not  debar  the  board 
from  increasing  the  amount  by  purchase. 

As  to  accommodation,  it  does  not  clearly  appear  that  the  site 
selected  by  the  board  is  nearer  the  center  of  school-going  or  of 
the  adult  population,  than  the  original  site.  Indeed,  the  geograph- 
ical center  and  the  present  and  prospective  center  of  population 
correspond  so  nearly,  that  it  seems  strange  that  the  thought  of  any 
other  location  than  one  at  or  near  the  geographical  center  was  ever 
entertained.  The  law  contemplates  that  all  the  children  of  a  district 
shall  have,  as  nearly  as  practicable,  equal  school  facilities. 

The  future  division  of  a  sub-district,  when  not  already  determined 
upon,  is  subject  to  so  many  contingencies  that  its  consideration 
should  have  but  little  influence  in  determining  the  location  of  a  school- 
house.  While  the  probabilities  of  the  future  should  not  be  ignored, 
the  necessities  of  the  present  must  be  observed. 

As  the  various  errors  alleged  by  appellant  to  exist  in  the  decision 
of  the  county  superintendent  have  been  substantially  answered  in 
the  preceeding  paragraphs,  a  more  particular  and  formal  considera- 
tion of  them  is,  for  brevity's  sake,  omitted. 

"  Taking  into  consideration  the  geographical  position  and  conven- 
ience of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the  sub-district,"  as  the  law 
requires,  conclusions  are  arrived  at  a  similar  to  those  expressed  by 
the  county  superintendent  in  his  decision,  which  is  hereby 

AFFIRMED. 
D.  FKAJSTKLIiN"  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
October  19,  1867. 


52  SCHOOL  LAW  DECIfelONS. 

H.  G.  Grattan  v.  The  District  Township  of  Ludlow. 

H.  G.  GKATTAN  et  al.,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  LUDLOW. 

Appeal  from  Allamakee  County.    • 

1.  SuB-DiSTRicrs :     Change  of  boundaries.    The   boundaries  of  sub-districts 
shall  be  changed,  or  new  districts  formed,  only  between  the  regular  meeting  of 
the  board  in  JSeptember,  and  the   sub-district  election  held  in  the  March,  follow- 
ing. 

2.  JURISDICTION.    The  county  superintendent  can  do  upon  appeal  only  what 
the  board,  originally  had  power  to  do. 

On  the  4th  diy  of  May,  1867,  H.  D.  Grattan  and  others,  pre- 
sented to  the  board  of  directors  of  Ludlow  township,  Allamakee 
county,  a  petition  praying  said  board  to  form  a  new  sub  district 
from  parts  of  sub-districts  numbered  One,  Two,  Five,  and  Six, 
respectively.  The  board  disclaimed  jurisdiction  in  the  matter,  and 
the  prayer  of  petitioners  was  denied.  The  said  Grattan  appealed 
to  the  county  superintendent,  who  decided,  June  24rth,  that  the  new 
sub-district  should  be  established,  and  its  boundaries  fixed  by  the 
board  at  their  regular  meeting  in  September,  that  a  school-house 
should  be  built  by  the  reside  tits  of  the  said  sub-district,  without 
expense  to  other  por  ions  of  the  township  district.'  From  this  decis- 
ion the  district  township  of  Ludlow  through  its  president,  J.  C. 
Smith,  appeals  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

/Samuel  If.  Kinne,  for  appellant. 

No  appearance  for  appellees. 

In  defining  the  powers  and  duties  of  the  board  of  directors,  the 
school  law  provides,  section  25,  chapter  1,  that  "  They  shall  at  their 
regular  meeting  in  September,  or  at  any  special  meeting  called 
thereafter,  for  that  purpose,  divide  their  townships  into  sub- 
districts.  *  *  *  Provided,  *  *  *  That  the  formation  and 
alteration  of  sub-districts  as  contemplated  in  this  section,  shall  not 
take  effect  until  the  next  sub-district  election  thereafter."  From  the 
reading  of  this  section,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the 
true  meaning  and  intent  of  the  law  is,  that  the  boundaries  of  sub- 
districts  shall  be  changed  and  new  sub-districts  formed,  only  between 
the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  in  September,  aud  the  first  Satur- 
day in  March.  This  view  is  sustained  also,  by  my  predecessors  in 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  63 


Benjamin  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Coffin's  Grove. 

office,  as  shown  by  note  to  section  29,  page  45,  school  laws,  edition 
of  1866.     (Section  24,  laws  of  1872.) 

It  follows,  then,  that  the  board  had  no  power  to  grant  the  petition 
and  form  a  new  sub-district  on  the  said  4th  of  May,  the  day  of 
presentation, 

The  county  superintendent  can  do  on  appeal  what  the  board 
might  legally  have  done,  but  can  do  nothing  more;  and  as  the 
board  was  restricted  from  the  formation  of  a  new  sub-district  on 
the  said  4th  of  May,  it  was  incompetent  for  the  county  superintend- 
ent to  do  it  in  his  decision  of  June  24th. 

In  requiring  the  new  sub-district  to  build  a  school-house  with- 
out assistance  from  other  portions  of  the  district  township,  the 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent  violates  the  letter  and  spirit 
of  the  law,  which  requires  that  the  echool-house  tax  shall  be  levied 
"  in  such  manner  as  justice  and  equity  may  require,  taking  as  the 
basis  of  said  apportionment  the  amounts  previously  levied  upon  said 
sub-districts." 

The  county  superintendent  erred  in  not  sustaining  the  action  of 
the  board  of  directors  of  Ludlow  district  township  in  refusing  to 
form  a  new  sub-district  on  the  4th  of  May,  and  his  decision  is 
therefore 

REVERSED. 

I).  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
December  14,  1867. 


BENJAMIN  SMITH,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  COFFIN'S  GROVE, 
DAVID  AYERS,  et  al,  Appellants. 

Appeal  from  Delaware  County. 

PROCEEDINGS.  la  the  absence  of  proof  to  the  contrary,  the  legal  presumption 
is  that  the  proceed  ings  of  the  county  superintendent  were  entirely  regular. 

On  the  petition  of  the  electors  of  sub-district  number  One,  Cof- 
fin's Grove  district  township,  the  board  of  directors  thereof  located 
the  site  of  a  proposed  new  school-house  "just  east  of  the  burying 
ground,  on  the  right-hand  side  of  the  road,  adjoining  the  corner  of 
Mr.  Brooks'  field."  From  this  action  plaintiff  appealed  to  the 
cuimty  superintendent  on  the  25th  of  March,  by  whom  the  case  was 


SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Benjamin  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Coffin's  Grove. 

heard  April  19,  1867.  On  the  13th  of  June,  the  county  superin- 
tendent issued  an  order  re-locating  the  site  three-fourths  of  a  mile 
further  south,  and  at  or  near  the  center  of  the  sub-district.  From 
this  order  an  appeal  is  taken,  and  thus  the  case  comes  up  for  re- 
view. 

Blair  &  Bronson,  for  appellants. 
E"o  appearance  for  appellee. 

The  appellants  claim  a  reversal  of  the  county  superintendent's 
decision  on  the  ground, 

1.  That  the  county  superintendent  had  no  jurisdiction  in  the 
matter. 

2.  That  the  county  superintendent  erred  in  not  taking  the  deposi- 
tions of  witnesses  in  writing  and  having  the  same  signed  and  sworn 
to  by  the  witnesses. 

3.  That  the  county  superintendent  erred  in  not  making  up  his 
record  at  the  time  of  trial. 

4.  On  the  merits  of  the  case. 

The  denial  of  the  county  superintendent's  jurisdiction  is  based  on 
the  fact  that  the  original  affidavit  does  not  state  that  the  appeal  was 
taken  within  thirty  days  of  the  action  of  the  board  complained  of 
and  reference  is  made  to  page  fifty-seven  of  "  explanatory  notes  "  in 
which  it  is  stated  that  this  fact  should  appear,  though  there  is  no 
such  specific  requirement  in  "  An  act  to  provide  for  appeals."  The 
question  naturally  arises  as  to  the  legal  force  of  these  "  explanatory 
notes-"  Have  they  the  effect  of  statutory  provisions,  or  otherwise? 
While  the  right  of  every  tribunal  to  establish  rules  and  regulations, 
not  inconsistent  with  law,  must  be  admitted,  these  "explanatory 
notes  "  made  by  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  are  not 
legal  enactments,  nor  "  rules  and  regulations,"  and  so  far  from  be- 
ing mandatory  in  their  character,  are  merely  advisory  and  directory, 
and  intended  for  the  assistance  and  guidance  of  school-officers. 
They  are  a  commentary  on  the  school  law;  and  as  they  are  replete 
with  good  common-sense  suggestions,  their  observance  will  render 
the  administration  of  the  school  law  more  accurate  and  satisfactory; 
but  a  non-compliance  with  them  is  not  necessarily  a  violation  ot 
law. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  an  affidavit  which  does  not  state  the 
date  of  the  decision  or  act  complained  of  is  very  carelessly  drawn, 
and  a  superintendent  might  be  justified  in  refusing  to  entertain  it; 
but  if  it  be  entertained,  it  is  still  competent  for  the  opposite  party 
to  show  that  the  thirty  days  allowed  by  law  had  expired  previous 
to  the  filing  of  the  affidavit,  and  thus  secure  the  dismissal  of  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DZCESIONS. 


Benjamin  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Coffin's  Grove. 

case.  The  law  gives  the  superintendent  jurisdiction  within  thirty 
days,  and  the  state  superintendent  could  not  by  any  rule  or  regula- 
tion annul  the  statutory  provision.  It  is  not  even  claimed  by 
appellants  that  the  time  for  taking  appeal  had  expired,  and  the 
date  of  petitions  submitted  to  the  board  indicate  that  it  had  not 
expired.  In  the  absence  of  proof  to  the  contrary,  the  legal  pre- 
sumption is,  that  the  proceedings  before  the  county  superintendent 
were  entirely  regular;  and  therefore  the  jurisdiction  of  the  superin- 
tendent must  be  sustained. 

The  second  and  third  errors  assigned  by  appellants  are  also  based 
on  "  explanatory  notes  "  instead  of  upon  the  law,  and  cannot  he 
sustained  for  reasons  previously  given.  While  there  were  things  in 
the  management  of  this  case  from  which  we  must  withhold  our 
commendation,  as  there  seems  to  have  been  a  substantial  compli- 
ance with  the  law,  we  do  not  ft  el  justified  in  dismissing  it  without 
an  examination  of  its  merits. 

The  courty  superintendent  gave  due  notice  of  the  hearing  in 
writing  to  all  the  electors  of  the  sub-district.  On  the  day  of 
hearing  several  persons  appeared,  but  no  *'  evidence  on  either  side 
was  offered "  except  the  original  affidavit  of  Benjamin  Smith. 
The  record  of  the  county  superintendent  goes  on  to  say:  "  But 
to  satisfy  myself  in  regard  to  the  number  of  inhabitants  that 
would  be  accommodated  best  by  the  site  remaining  where  it  is  at 
present  located  by  said  board,"  Nelson  Bly,  James  McBride  and 
Henry  Baker  were  sworn.  "  Nelson  Bly  stated  that  about  thirty 
families  lived  in  said  sub-district,  and  that  only  about  one-third 
would  be  accommodated  by  the  site  remaining  where  it  is  at 
present  located  by  said  board.  James  McBride  corroborated  the 
statements  made  by  Nelson  Bly."  After  Henry  Baker  was  sworn, 
u  so  much  confusion  and  controversy  arose "  that  it  was  found 
"  almost  impossible  to  preserve  order,"  and  the  superintendent 
"  proceeded  to  view  the  different  sites." 

Among  the  papers  sent  up  by  the  district  secretary  were  two 
petitions  to  the  board,  one  signed  by  fifteen  persons  asking  that 
the  site  should  be  located  u  at  or  near  the  cornor  of  Mr.  Brooks' 
fie:d;"  the  other  signed  by  twenty-three  persons,  asking  that  the 
site  be  "  established  as  near  as  practicable  in  the  center  of  the  sub- 
district." 

In  view  of  the  facts  before  us,  we  cannot  do  otherwise  than  sus- 
tain the  county  superintendent,  whose  decision  is 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS,  ^ 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction 
December  16,  1867. 

s9 


66  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Henry  Heisey  v.  The  District  Township  of  Castle  Giw 


HENRY   HEISEY,  et  al,  v.    THE   DISTRICT   TOWNSHIP   OF   CASTLE 

GROVE. 

Appeal  from  Jones  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE.  Location  of.  lu  fixing  the  school-house  site,  its  geo- 
graphical position,  and  the  convenience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the 
sub  district  should  be  considered. 

September  16th,  A  D.  1867,  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district 
township  of  Castle  Grove,  Jones  county,  Iowa,  voted  to  remove 
the  school-house  in  sub-district  number  Six,  from -a  point  thirty- 
four  rods  .north  of  the  geographical  center  of  the  sub-district,  to  a 
point  two  hundred  and  six  rods  north  of  said  geographical  center. 
From  this  action,  Henry  Heisey  and  others,  resident  tax-payers 
in  said  sub-district,  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who, 
on  the  fifth  day  of  October,  after  a  patient  hearing  of  the  cause, 
annulled  the  said  order  of  the  board.  From  this  decision  of  the 
county  superintendent,  John  McLees,  a  patron  of  the  school  and  a 
resident  director  of  said  sub-district,  appeals  to  the  superintendent 
of  public  instruction. 

No  appearance  fur  appellant. 
John  McKean  for  appellee. 

The  appellant  in  his  affidavit,  claims  that  the  new  site  is  on  a 
good  county  road,  while  the  old  one  is  three-fourths  of  a  mile 
from  any  road.  He  also  claims  that  the  new  eite,  as  located  by 
the  board,  is  nearer  the  majority  of  the  patrons  of  the  school  than 
the  old  site.  But  these  claims  are  unsupported  by  the  evidence 
adduced  on  the  trial  before  the  county  superintendent,  as  shown  by 
the  transcript. 

The  testimony  of  Mr.  Heisey,  corroborated  hy  that  of  several 
other  persons,  shows  that  the  whole  sub-district  is  prairie  ground 
and  suitable  for  settlement  and  cultivation  ;  that  the  present  site  is 
on  a  north  and  sourh  road  which  is  opened  the  whole  distance, 
with  the  exception  of  eighty  rods,  which  will  be  open  this  Winter; 
that  the  present  site  is  not  only  nearer  the  geographical  center  of 
the  sub-district  than  the  one'  proposed  by  the  board,  but  is  also 
nearer  the  present  and  prospective  center  of  adult  as  well  as 
juvenile  population.  More  than  two-thirds  of  the  youth  of  school 
age  within  the  sub-district,  live  nearer  to  the  present  site  than  the 
one  proposed  by  the  board.  Even  if  the  road  is  not  open  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  £7 


H.  M.  Reed  v.  The  District  Township  of  Fairfield. 

whole  distance,  the  removal  of  the  house  would  benefit  the  few  at 
the  expense  of  the  many. 

All  considerations  of  economy,  convenience  and  equity,  enforce 
the  belief,  that  the  school-house  in.eaid  sub-district  number  Six, 
of  the  district  township  of  Castle  Grove,  should  remain  v;here  it  is 
at  present  located,  and  should  not  be  removed  to  the  sire  determined 
by  the  board.  The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  therefore 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
January  15,  1868. 


H.  M,  REED  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  FAIRFIELD. 
Appeal  Jrom  Jackson   County. 

SUB-DISTRICTS  :  Formation  of.  While  the  law  contemplates  that  all  the  youth 
of  the  state,  shall  enjoy  facilities  for  education  as  nearly  equal  as  practicable, 
yet  in  the  formation  of  sub-districts  cire  should  be  taken  that  they  are  not  made 
so  small  geographically,  and  weak  financially,  as  to  be  unable  to  maintain  good 
schools. 

At  the  regular  somi-annual  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors 
of  Fairfield  district  township,  held  September  16tn,  1867,  a  resolu- 
tion was  offered  to  re-district  that  part  of  the  township  lying 
south  of  the  Maquoketa  river  into  five  sub-districts.  The  vote 
resulted  in  a  tie;  and  from  this  virtual  refusal  to  act,  H.  M,  Reed 
took  an  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  after  a  full  hear- . 
ing,  re-districted  said  territory  into  five  sub-districts.  From  this 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent,  John  Holroyd  takes  appeal, 
and  thus  the  cause  comes  before  the  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction for  review. 

The  law  contemplates  that  all  the  youth  of  the  state  shall  enjoy 
facilities  for  education  as  nearly  equal  as  practicable ;  but  the  testi- 
mony in  this  case  shows  that  several  families  are  practically  denied 
school  advantages  on  account  of  distance,  some  residing  from  four  to 
five  miles  from  any  school-house. 

The  division  of  said  territory  into  five  sub-districts  was  approved  by 
the  electors  at  their  annual  township  district  meeting,  by  one-half  of 
the  board  of  directors,  and  by  the  county  superintendent;  and  as 
there  is  no  violation  of  law  or  sacrifice  of  justice  and  equity,  we  aie 


SCHOOL  IAW  DEJISIONS. 


Charles  S.  Gordon  v.  The  District  Township  of  Brown. 


constrained  to  acquiesce  in  their  judgment,  and  sanction  the  decis- 
ion of  the  county  superintendent.  We  will,  however,  call  attention 
to  the  fact,  that  the  three  sub-districts  formed  from  the  old  "  number 
Two,"  are  geographically  small  and  financially  weak;  and  we  there- 
fore suggest  that  the  interests  of  the  township  might  better  be  sub- 
served by  dividing  the  old  sub-district  number  Two  into  only  two 
sub-districts,  and  removing  the  school-house  now  erected  to  a  cen- 
tral location  in  one  of  them,  and  then  building  only  one  new  house. 
There  is  an  objection  to  making  sub-districts  too  small,  on  account 
of  the  increased  difficulty  and  expense  of  sustaining  good  schools. 
Two  schools  in  the  old  sub-district  number  Two,  properly  located, 
would  undoubtedly  accommodate  the  people  and  pupils  reasonably 
well.  If  this  suggestion  is  approved  by  the  board  of  directors,  they 
may  give  it  practical  effect,  the  preceding  part  of  this  decision  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding. 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FEANKLIJST  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
January  15,  1868. 


CHARLES  S.  GORDON  v.  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  BR  >wx. 
Appeal  from  Linn  County. 

1.  DEFAULT:    The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  when  rendered  by 
default,  will  be  affirmed  unless  the  parties  have  failed  to  receive  proper  notice,  or 
other  good  reasons  are  shown  to  exist,  for  failure  to  appear. 

2.  CONDITIONAL  JUDGMENT:    May  be  rendered  if  the  interests  of  the  district 
require. 

October  12th,  1867,  Charles  S.  Gordon  and  twenty  others  pre- 
sented a  petition  to  the  board  of  directors  of  Brown  district  township, 
Linn  county,  for  a  new  sub-district,  which  the  board  refused  to 
grant.  Appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  Novem- 
ber 12th,  formed  a  new  sub-district  from  the  east  three-fourths  of 
section  thirty-four  and  west  one-half  of  section  thirty-live.  From 
this  decision  the  board  appeals  to  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction. 

As  the  board  permitted  judgment  to  be  rendered  by  default,  the 
rules  which  we  have  prescribed  for  our  guidance,  require  the  affirm- 
ance of  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent;  but  inasmuch  as 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Joseph  F.  Edwards  v.  The  District  Township  of  West  Point. 


there  seems  to  have  been  a  misunderstanding  as  to  the  time  when  a 
final  hearing  would  take  place,  and  as  the  sub-district  formed  is 
evidently  too  small  to  subserve  the  best  educational  interests  of  the 
district,  it  is  hereby  provided  that  the  board  may  so  far  disregard  the 
preceding  decision  as  to  re-district  the  district  township,  so  that  a 
school-house  shall  be  located  at  or  near  the  junction  of  sections 
thirty  and  thirty- two,  another  school-house  at  or  near  the  junction  of 
sections  twenty- eight  and  thirty-four,  another  school-house  at  or  near  the 
junction  of  sections  twenty-six  and  thirty-six,  with  such  other  modi- 
fications in  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts  and  the  location  of  school- 
houses,  as  the  convenience  of  the  inhabitants  and  the  interests  of 
education  may  seem  to  require.  If  the  board  of  directors  promptly 
make  the  changes  herein  indicated,  the  decision  of  the  county  super- 
intendent shall  be  void:  otherwise  in  full  force  and  effect. 

D.  FRAKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
January  28,  1868. 


JOSEPH  F.   EDWARDS,  et  at.  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  WEST 

POINT. 

Appeal  from  Lee  County. 

SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES  :  Change  of. — The  acts  of  a  board  of  directors 
changing  sub-district  boundaries  and  locating  school- houses  are  so  far  discretion- 
ary that  they  should  be  affirmed  on  appeal,  unless  it  is  shown  that  there  has  been 
an  abuse  of  discretion. 

September  16,  1867,  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township 
of  West  Point,  Lee  county,  transferred  one  hundred  and  twenty 
acres  of  land  belonging  to  one  Timothy  Allen,  from  sub-district 
number  One  to  sub-district  number  Three,  in  the  same  district 
township.  From  this  alteration  of  sub-district  boundaries,  Joseph 
Edwards  et  al.  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  by  whom  the 
order  of  the  board  of  directors  was  reversed.  From  this  decision 
of  the  county  superintendent,  Timothy  Allen  appeals  to  the  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction. 

J.  Van  Valkensburg  arid  O.  C.  Nourse  for  appellant. 
J.  M.  Casey  for  appellee. 


70  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Joseph  F.  Edwards  v.  The  District  Township  of  West  Poiiit. 


It  is  not  claimed  that  the  board  of  directors  exceeded  their  powers 
in  changing  boundary  lines,  or  in  any  respect  violated  law.  While 
equality  among  the  several  sub-districts,  in  area,  population,  and 
taxable  property,  is,  in  some  respects  desirable,  it  is  not  required  by 
law,  and  in  fact  is  impracticable.  The  claim  in  the  argument  of 
appellees  that  the  action  of  the  board  was  necessarily  wrong,  because 
it  had  the  effect  to  increase  the  inequality  in  some  or  all  of  these 
respects,  is  not  well  founded.  It  is  an  element  which  should  receive 
proper  consideration,  but  it  will  not  always  exercise  a  controlling 
influence. 

Mr.  Nourse,  in  his  argument  for  appellant,  claims  that  "  no 
right  of  appeal  existed  in  the  plaintiffs  who  took  the  case  to  the 
county  superintendent ; "  hence  the  county  superintendent  was 
without  jurisdiction.  He  claims  that  to  entitle  a  person  to  the 
right  of  appeal  the  grievance  must  be  of  a  personal  character — 
one  that  affects  the  rights  or  interests  of  the  individual  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  public.  In  support  of  this  view  he  refers  to 
the  following  decisions  by  our  supreme  court  •  Humphrey  v.  Ball, 
4  G.  Green,  204;  Myers  v.  Simms,  4  Iowa,  500;  McCune  v. 
Swaford,  5  Iowa,  552;  Lippencott  v.  Allender,  December  Term, 
1867.  In  all  of  these  cases  it  is  held  that  there  is  no  appeal  from 
the  county  court  or  the  board  of  supervisors,  unless  the  grievance 
is  of  a  personal  or  individual  character  as  distinguished  from  the 
public;  and  hence  by  analogy  it  is  claimed  that  there  is  no  appeal 
from  the  board  of  school  directors  unless  the  grievance  is  of  a  like 
character.  If  the  right  of  appeal  in  the  two  cases  was  derived 
from  the  same  statute,  the  decisions  cited  above  would  be  conclu- 
sive. But  these  decisions  are  based  upon  section  267,  Revision  of 
1860,  in  which  the  right  of  appeal  is  limited  to  "  any  matter  affect- 
ing the  rights  or  interests  of  individuals  as  distinguished  from  the 
public,"  etc. ;  while  appeals  to  county  superintendents  are  based  on 
section  2133,  Revision  1860,  which  provides  that  u  any  person 
aggrieved  by  any  decision  or  order  of  the  district  board  of  directors 
in  matter  of  law  or  fact,"  may  appeal,  etc. 

As  section  2133  does  not  limit  the  right  of  appeal  to  cases  of 
personal  grievance,  the  decisions  cited  have  no  application  in  the 
case  under  consideration. 

The  important  point  upon  which  the  issue  in  this  case  must  turn 
remains  to  be  stated.  The  meeting  at  which  the  change  of  sub- 
district  boundaries  was  made  was  attended  by  six  of  the  eight 
members  of  the  board,  and  after  a  full  discussion  of  the  proposed 
change  and  an  examination  of  plats  of  the  district,  the  change  was 
made  by  unanimous  vote,  and  subsequently  approved  by  one  of 
the  absent  members.  The  remaining  sub-director,  who  resides  in 
the  sub-district  from  which  the  territory  was  taken,  opposes  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  71 


Joseph  F.  Edwards  v.  The  District  Township  of  West  Point. 


change.  It  is  not  claimed  that  the  law  was  violated  in  the  change, 
but  only  that  the  educational  interests  of  the  district  were  im- 
paired. 

The  question  is  not  so  much  one  of  law  as  of  sound  judgment 
and  discretion.  The  change  was  approved  by  seven  of  the  eight 
members  of  the  board,  who  reside  in  different  parts  of  the  town- 
ship, six  of  whom  at  least,  are  absolutely  without  personal  interest 
in  the  matter.  It  is  opposed  by  one  whose  pecuniary  interests  are 
contingently  adversely  affected.  The  county  superintendent  opposes 
his  judgment  to  the  judgment  of  the  board.  What,  in  such  a  case, 
is  the  duty  of  the  ultimate  tribunal? 

The  superintendent  of  public  instruction  has,  as  in  duty  bound, 
an  earnest  desire  to  sustain  the  acts  and  decisions  of  county  super- 
intendents. The  leg-tl  presumption  is  always  in  favor  of  the 
correctness  of  official  acts  and  decisions.  While  the  state  super- 
intendent applies  this  principle  to  county  superintendents,  it  is 
equally  incumbent  upon  them  to  apply  it  to  the  decisions  or  orders 
of  district  boards  of  directors.  It  not  unfrequently  happens  that 
county  superintendents  decide  appeal  cases  upon  their  own  judg- 
ment and  discretion  as  if  they  had  original,  instead  of  appellate, 
jurisdiction;'  and  fail  to  give  that  consideration  to  the  discretion  of 
district  boards,  which  the  above  principle  requires. 

The  law  prescribing  the  duties  of  boards  of  directors  is,  in  some 
respects,  7nandatory,  requiring  that  certain  specified  duties  shall 
be  performed  in  a  particular  manner.  In  other  cases,  the  board 
acts  as  a  local  legislature,  and  its  action  is  discretionary.  Among 
these  discretionary  powers,  though  not  including  all  of  them,  are 
the  establishment  and  change  of  sub-district  boundaries  and  the 
location  of  school-houses.  It  has  been  doubted  by  some  whether 
an  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent,  from  acts  of  the  board 
wholly  discretionary,  would  lie.  While  the  right  of  appeal  in  such 
cases  is  maintained,  the  real  character  should  not  be  lost  sight  of; 
and  the  action  of  the  board  within  the  limits  of  the  law  should 
not  be  reversed  unless  it  is  evident  that  it  acted  with  passion,  pre- 
judice or  manifest  injustice.  It  is  a  general  principle  in  law  that 
the  exercise  of  discretionary  power  will  not  be  interfered  with 
unless  it  is  fully  apparent  that  such  power  has  been  abused.  (For 
further  remarks  on  discretionary  power  and  the  manner  of  proving 
its  abuse,  reference  is  made  to  the  case  of  Maria  L.  Dougherty  v. 
L.  D.  Tracy,  county  superintendent^) 

In  changing  sub-district  boundaries,  and  locating  school-houses, 
the  law  gives  the  board  of  directors  original  jurisdiction,  and  as  it  is 
discretionary  power,  the  action  of  the  board  should  be  affirmed  on 
appeal,  unless  it  is  fully  apparent  by  the  evidence,  that  the  board 
violated  law  or  abused  its  discretion.  If  there  is  a  reasonable 


72  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


James  C.  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Maquoketa. 

doubt,  the  board  is  entitled  to  its  benefit.  The  action  of  the  board 
may  not  be  wholly  approved  by  the  judgment  of  the  county  super- 
intendent, but  if  it  be  not  illegal  or  cleirly  unjust,  it  should  be  sus- 
tained. When,  however,  county  superintendents  feel  called  upon  to 
reverse  decisions  of  school  boards,  they  should  give  a  clear  and 
explicit  statement  of  their  reasons  for  so  doing,  that  the  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction  may  be  the  better  enabled  to  judge  of 
soundness  of  their  conclusions. 

These  general  remarks  have  been  made  with  a  view  to  guide  county 
superintendents  in  their  decisions,  as  well  as  to  indicate  some  of  the 
principles  which  will  be  observed  by  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction  in  the  adjudication  of  similar  cases. 

In  the  particular  case  under  consideration,  the  board  of  directors 
with  unusual  unanimity,  preformed  a  discretionary  act.  It  is  not 
claimed  that  this  act  was  illegal,  or  that  the  board  was  influenced 
by  improper  motives.  It  is  not  satisfactorily  proven  that  the  act 
was  unjust.  In  our  opinion,  the  evidence  does  not  sustain  the 
county  superintendent  in  annulling  the  order  of  the  board,  and  his 
decision  is  therefore  REVERSED, 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
February  15,  1868. 


JAMES  C.  SMITH  v.  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  MAQUOKETA. 
Appeal  from  Jackson  County. 

1.  AFFIDAVIT:    The  affi  lavit  may  be  amended  when  such  action   is  not 
prejudicial  to  the  rights  of  any  pirty  interested. 

2.  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  :    May  upon  appeal  create  sub-district. 

At  the  regular  semi-annual  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of 
the  district  township  of  Maqnoketa  in  September,  1867,  Jacob 
Markle  and  twenty-seven  others  presented  a  petition,  asking  that  all  of 
that  portion  of  sub-district  number  Five,  lying  south  of  the  Maquoketa 
river  should  be  set  off  into  a  separate  sub-district.  The  prayer  of 
the  petition  was  refused,  whereupon  James  C.  Smith,  one  of  the 
petitioners,  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who  reversed  the 
action  of  the  board,  and  created  a  new  sub-district  south  of  the  river. 
From  this  decision,  D.  F.  Fair  and  E.  H.  Patterson  appeal  to  the 
state  superintendent. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  73 


James  C.  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Maquoketa. 

The  evidence  discloses  the  following  facts:  sub-district  number 
Five  is  civirled  by  the  Maquoketa  river  into  two  nearly  equal  por- 
tions, the  school-house  being  situated  on  the  north  side  of  the  river. 
Said  river  is  a  navigable  stream,  the  only  means  of  crossing  it  being 
the  ice  in  Winter  and  a  ferry  in  Summer.  It  is  subject  to  freshets 
and  obstructions  from  ice,  so  as  to  be  impassable  for  days  in  succes- 
sion. The  weight  of  evidence  shows  the  river  to  be  such  an 
obstruction,  that  children  cannot,  with  reasonable  facility  enjoy  the 
advantages  of  a  school  on  the  opposite  side  from  that  on  which  they 
reside.  That  this  difficulty  was  recognized  by  the  board  is  evidenced 
by  the  fact,  that  an  appropriation  of  forty  dollars  was  made  las': 
Summer  to  support  a  school  in  that  part  of  the  sub-district  south  of 
the  river.  Some  children  have  never  attended  school  north  of  the 
river,  because  their  parents  consider  the  crossing  of  the  river  fraught 
with  danger. 

Charles  Rich  for  appellant. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 

The  appellant  assigns  three  errors: 

1.  The  insufficiency  of  the  affidavit  of  J.  C.  Smith,  and  the  con- 
sequent want  of  jurisdiction  by  the  county  superintendent. 

2.  That  the  county  superintendent  permitted  said  affidavit  to  be 
amended  on  the  day  of  trial,  thus  admitting  its  insufficiency. 

3.  That  the  county  superintendent  divided  said  sub-district  num- 
ber Five  into  two  sub-distric's. 

The  system  of  appeals  to  county  superintendents  was  inaugurated 
to  provide  a  speedy  and  inexpensive  method  of  adjusting  difficulties 
arising  in  the  administration  of  school  laws.  From  the  fact  that 
many  of  the  cases  arising,  are  prosecuted  by  the  parties  interested 
without  the  intervention  or  assistance  of  lawyers,  no  very  stringeut 
rules  of  practice  have  been  adopted.  The  object  of  this  system  of 
appeals,  is  to  promote  uniformity  in  the  operation  of  school  laws, 
and  the  attainment  of  substantial  justice;  and  this  object  should  not 
be  defeated  by  technical  objections. 

While  the  affidavit  of  said  Smith  was  not  as  full  as  it  is  customary 
to  make  such  papers,  it  yet  had  such  completeness  as  enabled  the 
county  superintendent  to  obtain  a  transcript  of  the  proceedings  of 
the  board  relating  to  the  alleged  grievance;  and  the  ruling  of  the 
county  superintendent  on  the  first  two  points  is  sustained.  It  is 
neither  intimated  nor  believed  that  the  irregularities  complained  of 
prejudiced  the  interests  of  appellants. 

The  law  imposes  equal  burdens  upon  all  property  in  the  township 
for  contributions  to  the  "  teachers'  fund"  and  the  "  contingent  fund," 
slO 


74  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Joel  Jones  v.  The  District  Township  of  Salein. 

and  it  contemplates  that  all  the  yonth  of  the  state  shall  enjoy  as 
nearly  as  practicable,  equal  educational  facilities.  The  county 
superintendent,  by  his  appellate  jurisdiction,  had  power  to  create 
the  new  sub-district.  As  by  the  evidence,  the  yonth  south  of  the 
river  could  not  with  reasonable  facility  enjoy  the  advantages  of  a 
school  on  the  north  side;  the  county  superintendent  was  justified  in 
interfering  with  the  discretionary  powers  of  the  board,  and  in  estab- 
lishing a  new  sub-district  south  of  the  river.  AFFIRMED. 

D.  FRAJSTKLIN  WELLS. 
Superintendent  of  PMic  Instruction . 
February  15, 1868. 


JOEL  JONES  et  al.  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  SALEM. 
Appeal  from  Henry  County. 

1.  TRANSCRIPT. — The  transcript  which  the  law  requires  the  secretary  to 
transmit  to  the  county  superintendent,  in  case  of  appeal,  must  be  full  and  com- 
plete. 

2.  CONDITIONAL  JUDGMENT — May  be  rendered  when  the  interests  of  the  dis- 
trict are  thereby  promoted. 

At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  Salein  district 
township,  Henry  county,  Iowa,  held  on  the  18th  day  of  March,  1867, 
two  petitions  to  re-district  said  township  were  received,  and  a  com- 
mittee appointed  to  report  thereon  at  a  subsequent  meeting  of  the 
board.  At  an  adjourned  meeting  of  the  board  held  April  20,  1867, 
said  committee  reported  in  favor  of  re-districting,  substantially  in 
compliance  with  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners.  The  report  was 
accepted,  the  committee  discharged,  and  the  report  laid  over  until 
the  regular  September  meeting.  The  report  of  the  committee  was 
called  up  at  the  September  meeting  of  the  board,  and  the  motion  to 
adopt  was  lost  by  a  tie  vote.  From  this  virtual  refusal  of  the  board  to 
re-district,  Joel  Jones  and  others  appealed  to  the  county  superinten- 
dent, by  whom  the  case  was  heard  November  21, 1867.  On  the  26th 
of  the  same  month,  the  county  superintendent  rendered  his  decision, 
reversing  the*  action  of  the  board,  granting  the  prayer  of  the 
petitioners,  and  changing  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts  as  indicated 
by  plat  marked  "A,"  submitted  with  the  transcript  of  proceedings. 
From  this  decision,  Peter  Hobson  et  al.  appeal  to  the  superintendent 
of  public  instruction. 

T.  8.  Woolson  for  appellants. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 


SCHOOL  LVW  DECISIONS. 


Joel  Jones  v.  The  District  Township  of  Salem. 


The  rejection  of  the  report  of  the  committee  by  the  board  was 
under  the  circumstances  a  virtual  refusal  to  grant  the  petition  to 
re-district,  as  prayed  by  petitioners;  and  hence  gave  the  county 
superintendent  jurisdiction  on  appeal. 

The  first  response  of  the  secretary  was  not  a  full  compliance 
with  the  law,  which  requires  him  to  send  np  "  a  complete 
transcript  of  the  record  and  proceedings  complained  of;"  and 
the  superintendent  was  justified  in  requiring  a  complete  transcript. 

An  undated,  unsealed  and  unstamped  drop-letter  is  certainly  not 
a  very  business-like  notice  of  hearing  for  the  superintendent  to  give 
the  appellant;  and  if  the  latter  had  not  purposely  avoided  the  hear- 
ing, but  had  appeared  and  shown  his  inability,  for  instance,  to  se- 
cure the  attendance  of  important  witnesses  on  account  of  absence 
and  insufficient  notice,  if  he  had  shown  that  the  attainment  of 
justice  would  be  jeopardized  by  proceeding  with  the  trial,  then  we 
might  feel  justified  in  interfering  with  the  superintendent's  discre- 
tion in  refusing  to  adjourn  the  trial. 

Other  allegations  of  the  appellants  not  being  well  supported  by 
evidence,  are  passed  by  without  comment. 

The  plats  submitted  show  that  the  old  sub-district  boundaries  are 
not  established  in  such  a  manner  as  to  promote  the  present  con- 
venience of  the  inhabitants;  and  from  other  evidence  adduced  on 
trial,  it  appears  that  said  boundaries  have  for  a  Ions:  time  been  un- 
satisfactory to  a  portion  of  the  people.  The  change  was  voted  for 
by  one-half  of  the  members  of  the  board  of  directors ;  arid  one  of 
the  members  who  voted  against  the  change  testified  during  the  trial, 
that  with  the  information  he  now  has,  he  would  vote  for  the  change. 
The  change  is  therefore  approved  by  a  majority  of  the  directors 
then  in  office.  After  a  protracted  investigation,  it  was  approved  by 
the  county  superintendent.  The  testimony  adduced  in  the  hearing 
before  the  county  superintendent  establishes  the  fact  that  the  edu- 
cational interests  of  the  township  will  be  promoted  by  the  change 
in  sub-district  boundaries,  as  indicated  by  the  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent.  We  are  therefore  constrained  to  affirm  his  de- 
cision. 

We  are,  however,  in  receipt  of  a  petition  from  ninety-five  citizens 
of  Salem  district  township,  including  all  of  the  ten  appellants  in 
this  case,  asking  that  still  further  modifications  shall  be  made;  and 
the  plat  which  they  submit  in  connection  therewith  meets  our  cordial 
approbation,  and  in  our  opinion  is  even  better  calculated  to  promote 
the  convenience  of  the  people,  than  the  plat  of  sub-districts  sub- 
mitted by  the  county  superintendent.  Now,  therefore,  if  the  board 
of  directors  shall  at  their  next  regular  meeting  in  September,  or  at 
a  special  meeting  called  thereafter  for  that  purpose,  change  the 


76  SCHOOL  LAW  D2CJSIONS. 


S.  L.  Curry  v.  The  District  Township  of  Franklin. 

boundaries  of  sub  districts  in  substantial  conformity  with  the  plat 
hereto  annexed,  and  submit  said  change  for  the  approval  of  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction,  said  boundary  lines,  when  so 
approved,  shall  be  the  established  boundaries  of  the  sub-districts  of 
Salem  district  township,  anything  in  the  preceding  part  of  this  de- 
cision to  the  contrary  notwithstanding;  but  if  said  board  fail  to  take 
such  action,  then  the  decision  of  the  county  supeiintendent  shall  re- 
main in  full  force  and  effect. 

AFFIRMED. 

I).  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
March  25,  1868. 


S.  L.   CURRY  v.   THE   DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  FRANKLIN,  SAMUEL 
FETRO,  Appellant. 

Appeal  from  Decatur  County. 

1.  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT;    Has  no  jurisdiction  of  an  appeal  until  an  af- 
fidavit is  filed. 

2.  AFFIDAVIT.    An  affidavit  is  a  statement  in  writing,  signed  and  made  upon 
oath  before  an  authorized  magistrate. 

3.  NOTICE.    The  county  superintendent  should  not  issue  notice  of  fiLial  hear- 
ing until  both  the  affidavit  and  the  transcript  of  the  district  secretary  have  been 
filed  in  his  office. 

December  16th,  1867,  at  a  special  meeting  of  the  board  ol 
directors,  a  vofe  to  change  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts  in  the 
district  township  of  Franklin,  Decatur  county,  so  as  to  form  a  new 
sub-district  in  accordance  with  the  prayer  of  petitioners,  resulted  in 
a  tie.  From  this  virtual  refusal  to  set,  S.  L.  Curry  appealed  to  the 
county  superintendent,  who  on  the  31st  of  the  same  month  formed 
a  new  sub-district. 


No  appearance  for  appellant. 
Ed  Curry  for  appellee. 


Appellant  alleges  in  his  affidavit  that  the  county  superintendent 
assumed  jurisdiction  of  this  case  without  warrant  of  law;  that 
there  never  was  "  at  any  time  an  affidavit  or  any  other  statement 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  7J 


S.  L.  Curry  v.  The  District  Township  of  Franklin. 


in  said  appeal  case  filed  in  the  office  of"  the  county  superintendent; 
hence  the  want  of  jurisdiction. 

The  "  act  to  provide  for  appeals,"  section  two,  provides  that 
"  The  basis  of  proceeding  shall  be  an  affidavit,  filed  by  the  party 
aggrieved  with  the  county  superintendent,  within  the  time  allowed 
for  taking  the  appeal."  An  affidavit  is  a  statement  in  writing, 
signed  and  made  upon  oath  before  an  authorized  magistrate.  A 
county  superintendent  can  have  no  proper  jurisdiction  of  an  appeal 
case,  until  such  affidavit  has  been  filed.  A  notice  of  intention  to 
file  an  affidavit,  a  verbal  complaint,  or  a  petition,  is  not  sufficient 
to  give  the  county  superintendent  jurisdiction  in  appeal  cases.  The 
affidavit  setting  forth  "the  errors  complained  of  in' a  plain  and 
concise  manner"  must  be  in  his  hands  before  he  is  justified  in  com- 
mencing proceedings.  The  decision  of  the  superintendent  recites 
that  the  affidavit  was  filed  December  21st,  which  might  be  taken 
as  conclusive,  it  it  was  not  contradicted  by  the  record.  The  tran- 
script shows  that  said  affidavit  was  not  subscribed  and  sworn  to 
until  December  28th,  hence  we  do  not  clearly  see  how  it  could  have 
been  filed  on  the  21st. 

December  24th,  four  days  before  the  affidavit  was  made,  and 
which  appellant  alleges  was  never  -filed  with  the  superintendent, 
said  superintendent  gave  notice  to  the  parties  that  the  hearing 
would  take  place  on  the  30th.  This  proceeding,  as  an  appeal  case, 
was  entirely  unauthorized  by  law;  and  as  he  commenced  proceed- 
ings in  di> regard  of  the  plain  provisions  of  law  and  without  legal 
jurisdiction,  his  decision  is  annulled.  It  may  be  said,  and  not  with- 
out authority,  that  as  both  parties  responded  to  the  notice,  and  came 
before  the  superintendent,  that  he  thereby  acquired  jurisdiction ; 
but  we  feel  unwilling  to  sanction  disregard  of  law  by  approving; 
such  great  irregularities. 

Without  touching  the  real  merits  of  the  question  at  issue — the 
formation  of  a  new  sub-district,  which  we  are  willing  to  leave  to 
the  local  authorities — we  refer  briefly  to  a  few  points  of  law  raised 
by  appellants. 

1.  The   county  superintendent    should  not  issue  notice  of  final 
hearing  until  both   the  affidavit  and  the  transcript  of  the  district 
secretary  have  been  filed  in  his  office. 

2.  The  law   does  not  require   that   a   revenue  stamp    shall  be 
affixed   to  an  affidavit;   hence   the  neglect   to   cancel    such  stamp 
when  affixed  is  immaterial. 

3.  Though  the  change  of  sub-district    boundaries  by  the  board 
of  directors  be  a  discretionary  act,  it  may  be  reviewed  by  the  countv 
superintendent  on  appeal ;  but  the  decision  of  the  board  should  not 
be  disturbed  unless  said   discretionary   power   has   been  abused  or 
exercised  unjustly. 


78  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Tunison  &  Roy  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wilton. 


4.  The  county  superintendent  should  have  received  the  remon- 
strances offered  on  trial  in  evidence,  and  exercised  his  judgment  as 
to  their  weight  and  value. 

REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
March  26,  1868. 


TUNISON  &  ROY  v.  THE  DISTRK  T  TOWNSHIP  OF  WILTON,  Appellant. 
Appeal  from  Muscatine  County. 

1.  JURISDICTI  >N  :     After   the   expiration   of  thirty  days  the  county  superin- 
tendent can  acquire  i;o  jurisdiction  in  appeal  cases. 

2.  APPEAL  :    All  unwise  or  inexpedient  action  of  the  board,  whether  of  law 
or  of  fact,  when  within  their  powers,  must  find  its  correction  by  an  appeal  to  the 
county  superintendent. 

March  18th,  1867,  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township 
of  Wilton,  in  accordance  with  a  petition  of  electors,  voted  to 
re-locate  the  site  of  the  school-house  in  sub-district  number 
Five,  of  said  district  township,  and  to  remove  the  school-house 
to  the  new  site.  On  the  26th  of  December  following,  Tunison  & 
Roy  appealed  ftvm  this  order  to  the  county  superintendent,  who 
February  10th,  1868,  rendered  his  decihion,  admitting  the  power 
of  the  board  to  change  the  site,  and  expressing  his  approval  of  the 
change  made,  but  reversing  the  order  of  the  board  so  far  as  it 
related  to  the  removal  of  the  house.  The  sub-district  was  formed 
prior  to  March  12th,  1858,  and  consisted  of  parts  of  two  civil  town- 
ships. 

Win.  F.    Krannan  for  appellant. 
Cloud  &  Broomkall  for  appellees. 

The  appellant  assigns  as  errors  the  following: 

1.  The  overruling  of  his  motion  to  dismiss. 

2.  The  reversal  of  the  order  of  the  board  of  directors  to  remove 
the  house. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  79 


Tunison  &  Roy  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wilton. 

The  question  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  county  superintendent  first 
demands  attention  An  act  to  provide  for  appeals,  section  2133, 
Revision  1860,  provides  that  "  any  person  aggrieved  by  any  decision 
or  order  of  district  board  of  directors,  in  matter  of  law  or  of  fact, 
may  within  thirty  days  after  the  rendition  of  such  decision  or  the 
making  of  such  order  appeal  therefrom  to  the  county  superintendent 
of  the  proper  county."  The  counsel  for  appellees,  quoting  this  sec- 
tion, say:  "  The  above  quoted  statute  is  not  unlike  the  statute 
allowing  appeals  from  the  county  court  (section  267,  Revision  1860), 
with  this  marked  difference,  that  in  the  latter  case  the  statute  is 
mandatory;  and  under  that  statute  the  supreme  court  has  said  that 
upon  a  proper  showing  an  appeal  can  be  taken  at  any  time  within 
one  year.  In  the  present  case  the  statute  says  an  appeal  may  be 
taken  at  any  time  within  thirty  days.  There  is  no  prohibition  upon 
an  appeal  after  that  time,  even  by  implication." 

If  this  argument  is  sound,  it  wrill  become  necessary  for  this  depart- 
ment to  reverse  its  decision  heretofore  made,  that  the  county  super- 
intendent can  acquire  no  jurisdiction,  unless  the  appeal  be  taken 
within  the  thirty  days  allowed  by  law. 

The  right  to  appeal  from  the  decision  or  order  of  a  board  of 
school  directors,  is  not  a  natural  and  universal  right,  and  it  can  be 
enjoyed  only  in  the  manner  and  to  the  extent  that  the  law  permits. 
It  ;s  true  that  the  law  does  not,  in  express  terms,  prohibit  an  appeal 
after  thirty  days;  but  the  right  of  appeal  after  the  expiration  of  that 
time  does  not  exist  simply  because  the  law  does  not  grant  it.  By 
implication  it  is  prohibited. 

As  asserted  by  counsel,  the  provisions  of  section  267,  Revision 
1860,  are,  in  s<>me  respects,  not  unlike  those  of  section  2133.  In 
both  the  right  of  appeal  is  limited  to  thirty  days.  But  the  decision 
of  the  supreme  court,  to  which  allusion  is  made,  but  to  which  no 
reference  is  given,  authorizing  an  appeal  at  any  time  within  one 
year,  is  probably  based  upon  section  270,  Revision  1860,  which 
expressly  extends  the  time  for  taking  an  appeal  from  the  county 
court,  in  certain  cases,  to  one  year.  There  is,  however,  no  corres- 
ponding provision  in  the  act  providing  for  appeals  to  county  superin- 
tendents; hence,  the  decision  referred  to,  has  no  application  whatever 
to  the  case  now  under  consideration.  In  the  case  of  State  v.  Flem- 
ing, 13  Iowa,  444,  the  supreme  court  says  substantially,  that  "  If  a 
party  fails  to  prosecute  his  remedy  by  appeal "  within  the  time 
allowed  by  law,  "  such  rght  is  forever  at  and  end."  The  act  under 
which  this  case  is  brought  provides  in  section  2134,  Revision,  that 
"  the  basis  of  proceeding  shall  be  \  y  an  affidavit,  filed  by  the  party 
aggrieved  with  the  county  superintendent,  within  the  time  allowed 
for  taking  the  appeal,"  which  the  previous  section  fixes  at  thirty 
days. 


80  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Tunison  &  Roy  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wilton. 

Ir  the  theory  of  the  county  superintendent  and  of  appellees  is 
correct,  and  the  right  of  appeal  is  not  limited  to  thirty  days,  then 
there  is  no  limit  fixed  by  Jaw;  and  decisions  or  orders  made  by 
boards  of  directors  years  ago  may  uow  be  reviewed  by  county  super- 
intendents, and  set  aside.  But  none  will  claim  this.  The  law 
demands  that  persons  who  are  aggrieved  by  the  action  of  boards  of 
directors  shall  seek  prompt  redress  by  appeal,  if  this  remedy  is 
sought  at  all. 

The  first  remedy  sought  by  the  parties  aggrieved  by  the  action  of 
the  board,  was  in  the  courts;  and  it  was  not  until  the  supreme  courr, 
decided,  at  the  December  term,  1867,  that  "  all  unwi-e  or  inexpedi- 
ent action  of  the  board,  whether  of  law  or  of  fact,  when  within  their 
powers,  must  find  its  correction  by  an  appeal  to  the  c<>untv  superin- 
tendent," that  the  affidavit  of  plaintiff  was  filed.  In  the  meantime 
nine  months  had  elapsed,  and  the  error,  though  innocent,  was  fatal. 

After  the  expiration  of  thirty  days,  the  county  superintendent 
can  acquire  no  jurisdiction  under  the  law,  in  appeal  cases.  The 
case  is,  therefore,  remanded  to  the  coun<y  superintendent,  who 
will  dismiss  the  same  for  want  of  jurisdiction;  and  the  board  of 
directots  will  have  full  liberty  to  carry  out  its  order  of  March  18, 
1867. 

It  may  not  be  improper  to  add  that  in  making  his  decision,  the 
county  superintendent  teems  to  have  been  influenced  by  the  fact 
that  the  sub-district  wTas  formed  prior  to  March  12,  1858,  from 
parts  of  two  civil  townships,  and  that  if  the  school-house  should 
he  moved,  the  territory  would  revert — section  78,  chapter  172,  laws 
1862 — to  the  district  townships  to  which  it  geographically  belongs. 
He  appears  also  to  have  been  impressed  with  the  belief  that 'the 
disintegration  of  the  sub  district,  and  the  consequent  equitable 
adjustment  of  assets  and  liabilities  would  necessitate  the  sale  of  the 
school-house,  which  could  not  be  accomplished  without  a  vote  of 
the  electors  of  the  district  township.  But  in  regard  to  the  necessity 
for  selling  the  house  in  order  to  adjust  the  differences,  the  county 
superintendent  is  believed  to  have  labored  under  a  misapprehen- 
sion. Any  amount  which  may  be  found  legally  dr.e  from  one 
district  township  to  the  other  in  consequence  of  the  removal  of 
the  house,  can  as  well  be  raised  from  existing  funds,  or  raised  by 
future  taxation. 

KEVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
June  6,  1868. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


C.  S.  Gordon  v.  District  Township  of  Brown. 


C.   S.  GORDON  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  BROWN,  Appellant. 
Appeal  from  Linn  County, 

1,  DISTRICT  TOW^JSHIP.     Should  not  ordinarily  contain  more  than  nice  sub- 
districts. 

2.  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT.    Should  not  reverse  an  action  of  the  board  of 
directors  which  is  in  accordance  with  instructions  of  the  superintendent  of  pub- 
lic instruction. 

The  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of  Brown,  Linn 
count)  ,  Iowa,  at  a  meeting  held  February  8th,  1868,  and  attended 
by  all  the  members  of  the  board  except  one,  voted  unanimously  to 
re-district  the  district  township,  and  to  re-locate  school-house 
sites  in  accordance  with  a  decision  of  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction,  rendered  January  28th,  1868,  and  in  accordance  with 
a  plat  submitted.  From  the  action  of  the  board  in  this  matter 
Charles  S.  Gordon  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  by 
whom  the  case  was  heard  March  12th,  1868,  and  whose  decision, 
rendered  the  following  day,  reversed  the  action  of  the  board  on 
the  ground  of  alleged  non-compliance  with  the  decision  of  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction,  as  rendered  on  the  said  Jan- 
uary 28th,  1868,  in  the  case  of  Gordon  v.  The  District  Township 
of  Brown. 

The  decision  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  above 
referred  to,  was  provisory.  It  declared  that  if  the  board  of  direct- 
ors should  promptly  make  certain  changes  therein  indicated,  that 
the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  made  November  12th, 
1867,  forming  a  new  sub-district,  should  be  void;  otherwise,  in 
full  force  and  effect.  It  required  that  school-house  sites  should  be 
selected  "  at  or  near"  certain  points  named;  thus  giving  the  board 
limited  discretion  in  their  location,  and  full  discretion  in  regard  to 
the  boundaries  of  sub-districts.  In  one  instance,  a  site  was  selected 
about  one-fourth  of  a  mile  from  the  point  indicated;  but  as  the  plat 
showed  that  it  was  at  the  crossing  of  two  roads,  and  that  it  was 
nearer  the  center  of  the  sub-district  as  established  by  the  board, 
this  variation  was  approved.  The  other  sites  selected  by  the  board 
did  not  vary  from  the  points  indicated  in  the  decision.  The 
changes  made  by  the  board  on  the  said  8th  day  of  February,  were 
submitted  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  who,  March 
3d,  gave  them  his  official  sanction  and  approval. 

Mr.  Gordon's  appeal  was  based  principally  upon  the  fact  that 
one  of  the  sites,  as  explained  above,  was  not  at  the  precise  po  rit 
sll 


82  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


C.  S.  Gordon  v.  District  Township  of  Brown. 


indicated  by  tlie  decision  of  the  superintendent  of  pnbl:c  instruc- 
tion; and  hence,  as  the  board  had  not  strictly  complied  with  the 
proviso  of  said  decision,  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent 
made  November  12th,  1867,  establishing  a  new  sub-district,  was  in 
full  force  and  effect,  and  should  have  been  regarded  by  the  board. 

In  support  of  its  action  the  board  offered  in  evidence  the  official 
approval  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction;  this  however, 
was  ruled  out,  by  the  county  superintendent,  on  the  alleged  ground 
that  it  was  "  exparte  testimony"  obtained  by  one  party  after  the  in- 
auguration of  the  appeal,  without  notice  to  the  other  party.  In  this 
ruling  the  county  superintendent  erred.  The  decision  of  the  super- 
it. tendent  of  public  instruction  being  provisory,  it  was  competent 
for  him  to  confirm  the  subsequent  action  of  the  board  in  relation 
thereto,  and  to  determine  whether  the  the  location  of  bite  made  was, 
under  the  circumstances,  a  sufficient  compliance  with  the  decision. 
The  phrase  li  at  or  near  "  implied  that  there  might  be  a  variation 
from  the  precise  point  named,  and  when  this  variation  was  officially 
approved,  it  was  binding  upon  the  county  superintendent. 

The  provisory  decision  of  January  28,  permitted  the  board  to  ex- 
ercise all  the  discretionary  power  in  re-districting  which  the  law 
confers.  From  their  exercise  of  this  power  also,  the  plaintiff  appeals. 
The  record  shows  that  there  are  now  ten  eub-districts  in  Brown  dis- 
trict township;  but  the  plaintiff  wishes  another  formed  which  shall 
contain  only  one  and  one-fourth  sections.  In  our  opinion  there  are 
serious  objections  to  the  formation  of  small  sub-districts.  The  small 
number  of  children  and  the  small  amount  of  taxable  property  which 
they  will  usually  contain,  will  insure  a  feeble  support  for  the  schools. 
Cheap  teachers,  short  terms  of  school,  and  poor  schools  will  inevitably 
result.  Not  every  man  can  have  a  public  school  in  his  own  imme- 
diate neighborhood.  It  is  better  that  children  should  go  a  little  far- 
ther, and  have  a  good  school  when  one  is  reached.  Except  in 
peculiar  circumstances,  we  doubt  whether  there  ever  ought  to  be 
more  than  nine  sub-districts  in  any  district  township  of  ordinary 
size,  and  it  might  be  better  to  have  only  six.  A  school  centrally 
located  on  every  four  or  six  sections  of  laud,  would  afford  reasonable 
facilities  to  all.  Even  in  populous  districts,  it  would  be  better  to 
increase  the  size  of  the  schools  and  have  more  than  one  teacher  if 
necessary,  than  to  adopt  the  disastrous  policy  of  sub-division. 

The  county  superintendent  in  his  lengthy  argument  in  support  of 
his  decision,  dwells  upon  some  slight  discrepancies  in  the  secretary's 
transcript.  At  a  meeting  of  the  board,  February  8th,  it  appears 
that  a  motion  was  made  to  "  proceed  to  re-district,"  &c.  One  tran- 
script says  this  motion  carried ;  the  other,  omits  such  a  statement. 
The  county  superintendent  alleges  that  it  was  carried  "  by  only  one 
vote."  Whether  it  carried  or  not  is,  under  the  circumstances, 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  33 


Seba  Norton  v.  The  District  Township  of  Cresco. 

entirely  immaterial;  as  a  motion  was  subsequently  unanimously 
adopted,  the  ayes  and  noes  being  called,  to  adopt  a  certain  plat  on 
which  the  changed  boundaries  of  the  sub-districts  were  marked,  and 
the  school-house  sites  indicated.  This  was  the  important  vote  of  the 
meeting,  and  in  regard  to  its  adoption  there  is  no  question.  Even 
admitting  that  one  man  did  not  vote  for  it  as  claimed,  there  was  still 
left  more  than  the  legally  required  number  of  votes.  But  the 
integrity  of  an  official  record  can  not  be  impeached  by  any  such 
collateral  proceeding.  It  was  error  to  admit  evidence  contradicting 
the  record. 

The  board  of  directors  had  full  discretionary  powers  in  the  matt-  r 
of  re-districting  the  township  district,  and  the  manner  in  which 
they  exercised  this  power  was  a  proper  subject  of  review  by  the 
county  superintendent  on  appeal.  At  the  time  the  plaintiff's 
affidavit  was  tiled,  the  county  superintendent  had  no  knowledge  that 
the  acts  of  the  board  on  said  8th  of  February  had  been  approved 
by  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  or  that  they  would  be 
so  approved;  he  therefore  properly  assumed  jurisdiction  of  the  case. 
When,  however,  the  action  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion became  known,  the  county  superintendent  should  have  been 
governed  by  it,  and  he  should  have  affirmed  the  action  of  the  board 
of  directors  or  dismissed  the  case. 

For  reasons  heretofore  given,  as  well  as  upon  the  real  merits  of  the 
case,  and  to  promote  the  educational  interests  of  the  district  town- 
ship at  large,  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is 

REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
June  8,  1868. 


SEBA  NORTON  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  CRESCO/ 
Appeal  from  Kossuth  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE  :  Location  of.— The  geographical  position  and  conveni- 
nience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  sub-district  must  be  considered. 

April  4th,  1868,  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of 
Cresco,  located  the  school-house  site  of  sub-district  number  Two  at  the 
south-east  corner  of  the  north-east  quarter  of  the  south-east  quarter 


g4  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Seba  Norton  v.  The  District  Township  of  Cresco. 

of  section  twenty-three,  township  ninety-five,  range  twenty-nine. 
From  this  action  Seba  Norton  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent 
who  April  llth,  1868,  affirmed  the  action  of  the  board. 

J.  G.  foster  for  appellant. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 

The  initiatory  affidavit  to  the  county  superintendent  sets  up  that 
the  site  "  is  on  the  extreme  eastern  boundary  of  the  habitable  portion 
of  the  sub-district,"  and  the  plat  submitted  shows  that  the  sub-dis- 
trict extends  west  therefrom  three  miles.  From  an  examination  of 
the  plat,  the  sub-district  appears  to  extend  east  only  to  the  east  line 
of  section  twenty-six;  in  which  case  the  location  is  very  unjust  to 
those  residing  in  the  western  part  of  the  sub-distrist.  But  even  if 
the  sub-district  extends  to  the  east  line  of  the  township,  the  school- 
house  is  only  one  mile  from  the  eastern  boundary,  while  it  is  three 
miles  from  the  western. 

The  plat  indicates  that  if  the  school-house  were  located  at  the  south- 
west corner  of  the  south-east  one-fourth  of  section  twenty-three,  that 
it  would  be  still  conveniently  accessible  to  the  people  in  the  eastern 
part  of  the  sub-district,  and  three-fourths  of  a  mile  nearer  to  those 
in  the  south-west. 

The  law  requires  that  in  fixing  "  the  site  for  each  school-house," 
the  board  shall  take  "  into  consideration  the  geographical  position 
and  convenience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the  sub-district." 
In  establishing  this  site,  the  board  seem  to  have  overlooked  the 
claims  of  the  people  of  the  west  and  south-west,  and  to  have  estab- 
lished it  with  reference  merely  to  the  convenience  of  the  people  of 
the  east. 

It  is  exceedingly  unpleasant  to  set  aside  the  action  of  the  board, 
and  especially  so  when  such  action  has  been  confirmed  by  the  county 
superintendent;  but  in  this  case  we  believe  the  law  requires  it  to  be 
done.  The  board  of  directors  are  therefore  directed  to  re-locate  said 
site  on  the  southern  line  of  the  south-east  quarter  of  said  section 
twenty-three,  and  as  near  to  the  south-west  corner  of  said  quarter 
section  as  a  suitable  site  can  be  obtained.  Said  site  may  be  upon 
either  side  of  the  east  and  west  road  or  highway.  REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
June  19,  1868. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  $5 


F.  M.  Markley  v.  The  District  Township  of  Ludlow. 

F.  M.  MARKLEY  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  LUDLOW. 
Appeal  from  ALlamakee  county. 

SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES  :  The  action  of  the  board  of  directors  upon  the 
question  of  forming  new  sub-districts  will  be  sustained,  on  appeal,  unless  it  is 
made  to  appear  that  their  action  was  illegal,  or  that  manifest  injustice  will  result 
therefrom.  The  refusal  of  a  board  of  directors  to  form  a  new  sub-district  from 
parts  of  four  sub-districts  which  comprise  four  sections  of  land  each,  arranged  in 
compact  form,  each  sub-district  having  a  school-house  centrally  located,  is  not 
such  an  act  of  injustice  or  such  an  abuse  oi  discretion  as  to  justify  the  interference 
of  either  the  county  superintendent  or  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

September  15th,  1867,  F.  M.  Markley  and  others  filed  with  the 
board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of  Ludlow,  a  petition 
asking  the  formation  of  a  new  sub-district  from  parts  of  sub-districts 
numbered  One,  Two,  Five,  and  Six  of  said  district  township. 
Without  rehearsing  all  the  attendant  facts,  it  is  sufficient  to  state 
that  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners  was  refused;  and  that  on  the 
29th  day  of  February,  1868,  the  county  superintendent  on  appeal 
reversed  the  action  of  the  board,  and  created  a  new  sub-district 
whose  limits  he  defined,  and  which  he  denominated  sub-district 
number  Ten.  From  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  as 
stated  above,  the  district  township  of  Ludlow  through  its  presi- 
dent, J.  C.  Smith,  takes  appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction . 

Samuel  11.  JTinne  for  appellant. 
Hatch  <&  Granger  for  appellee. 

By  the  mutual  agreement  of  parties,  as  shown  by  the  records,  the 
case  was  submitted  on  the  evidence  adduced  in  the  case  of  G-rattan 
v.  T/ie  District  Township  of  Ludlow,  determined  by  the  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction,  December  14th,  1867. 

Some  irregularities  are  alleged  in  the  hearing  before  the  county 
superintendent,  but  as  these  appear  to  have  been  wirhout  prejudice 
to  the  other  party,  their  consideration  is  omitted,  and  the  case  will 
be  determined  upon  its  merits. 

The  evidence  discloses  that  Ludlow  district  township  is  divided 
into  nine  sub-districts  of  four  sections  each,  and  that  the  school- 
house  in  each,  particularly  in  that  part  of  the  township  under  con- 
sideration, is  located  at  or  near  the  geographical  center  of  the  sub- 
district. 

The  new  sub-district,  as  formed  by  the  county  superintendent, 
includes  a  well-settled  neighborhood  at  the  crossing  of  two  roads, 
and  the  intersection  of  four  sub-districts.  One  of  these  roads  is  a 


§6  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


F.  M.  Markley  v.  The  District  Township  of  Ludlow. 


stage  route  and  is  kept  open  in  winter;  the  other  is  well  traveled. 
All  the  roads  of  the  township,  though  generally  good,  are  liable 
to  be  drifted  in  winter,  so  as  to  be  difficult,  and  at  times  impassable 
for  children.  The  uncontradicted  testimony  of  at  least  three 
witnesses  is  to  the  effect  that  the  roads  from  the  neighborhood  in 
question,  to  the  several  school-houses,  are  as  good  as  the  roads 
in  other  portions  of  the  township,  if  not  better.  The  school 
facilities  in  sub-districts  One,  Two,  Five,  and  Six,  are  fully  as  good 
as  in  other  sub-districts,  and  by  some  witnesses  thought  to  be  better. 
A  majority  of  those  to  be  accommodated  by  the  new  sub-district 
reside  at  a  distance  from  one  mile  to  two  miles  from  any  school- 
house  now  erected  or  in  contemplation.  There  are  about  forty 
children  of  school  age — from  five  to  twenty-one  years — within  the 
limits  of  the  proposed  new  sub-district. 

The  claim  for  the  new  sub-district  is  based  substantially  upon 
drifted  roads,  distance,  and  the  number  of  children.  It  is  alleged 
that  the  first  two  are  of  such  a  character  as  to  seriously  abridge  the 
enjoyment  of  school  privileges.  There  is  nothing  in  the  testimony 
which  indicates  that  the  petitioners  for  the  new  sub-districts  are 
compelled  to  endure  any  peculiar  hardship  arising  from  drifted 
snow,  beyond  what  is  endured  by  their  neighbors  in  other  por- 
tions of  the  township.  On  the  other  hand  they  claim  that  one-half 
of  the  distance  they  are  now  required  to  travel  to  reach  a  school- 
house,  is  less  liable  to  permanent  obstructions  than  most  of  the 
roads  of  the  township;  indeed,  one  of  the  arguments  for  the  new 
sub-district  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  the  "  post-road  "  is  always 
open.  The  consideration  of  distance  is  intimately  associated  with 
the  number,  size,  and  shape  of  sub-districts  in  the  district  township, 
as  well  as  with  the  location  of  school-houses. 

The  manner  in  which  a  district  township  should  be  divided  into 
sub- districts  is  a  subject  in  regard  to  which  a  great  variety  of 
opinion  may  exist.  Its  practical  solution  requires  the  exercise  of 
sound  judgment  and  discretion.  A  former  superintendent  of  pub- 
lic instruction  was  of  the  opinion  that  each  sub-district  should 
comprise  nine  sections  of  land.  Thus  divided,  an  ordinary  con- 
gressional township  could  contain  but  four  sub-districts;  and  even 
if  compactly  formed,  and  the  school-houses  centrally  located, 
persons  might  reside  at  a  distance  of  three  miles  from  the  school- 
house.  This  he  thought  would  provide  good  educational  facilities 
so  far  as  distance  is  concerned.  This  view  of  the  case  has  not 
been  universally  accepted ;  yet  the  adherence  to  it  has  been  closer 
than  is  generally  believed.  The  last  published  report  of  the  state 
superintendent  to  the  general  assembly  shows  that  the  average 
number  of  sub-districts  to  each  district  township  throughout  the 
whole  state  in  less  than  Jive.  The  ratio  for  the  county  of  Allamakee, 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


F.  M.  Markley  v.  The  District  Township  of  Ludlow. 


and  indeed  for  the  older  and  more  populous  counties,  is  only 
about  six.  The  district  township  of  Ludlow  already  contains  nine 
sub-districts,  there  being  only  two  other  townships  in  the  county 
that  contain  an  equal  number.  My  immediate  predecessor  in  office 
in  referring  to  this  subject  used  the  following  language:  "  As  a 
general  rule,  it  is  better  to  have  large  sub-districts  with  good  school- 
houses  well  furnished,  than  to  have  small  sub-districts  with  small 
and  poorly  furnished  school-houses."  This  view  is  entertained,  not 
only  by  the  prominent  educators  of  Iowa,  but  by  those  of  other 
states.  The  danger  is  that  we  may  continue  to  divide  and  sub- 
divide until  the  sub-districts  become  so  numerous  that  the  school 
buildings  will  he  of  an  inferior  character,  and  the  schools  taught  in 
them  practically  worthless.  The  common  school  reform  in  other 
states  has  been  characterized  by  the  consolidation  rather  than  the 
division  of  districts.  Iowa  should  avoid  the  necessity  for  consolida- 
tion by  keeping  the  sub-districts  oi  a  good,  life-sustaining  size.  As 
the  number  of  sub-districts  is  increased  beyond  a  certain  limit,  the 
size  of  the  schools  will  naturally  be  diminished;  and  when  the 
schools  are  small  there  is  a  very  common  teeling  that  the  teachers 
must  be  cheap,  hence  the  instruction  is  poor.  There  are  other 
localities  in  Ludlow  district  township  whose  inhabitants  are  at  the 
same  distance  from  school  as  the  petitioners,  and  whose  roads  are 
equally  drifted  by  snow,  and  who  have  Lie  same  claim  with  the 
petitioners  in  these  respects  to  a  new  sub-district.  I  have  learned 
incidentally  that  in  some  of  these  localities  appeals  have  already 
been  taken,  and  that  in  others  tbey  are  contemplated;  so  that  the 
question  is  not  practically  whether  the  number  of  sub-districts  shall 
be  increased  to  ten  but  whether  it  shall  be  indefinitely  increased. 
While  the  establishment  of  the  proposed  new  sub-district  would 
undoubtedly  promote  the  convenience  of  a  few,  there  are  serious 
doubts  whether  it  would  subserve  the  best  educational  interests  of 
the  district  township.  The  proposed  sub-district  contains  about 
forty  persons  from  five  to  twenty-one  years  of  age,  but  for  whom  the 
houses  already  built  contain  ample  accommodations.  As  a  rule, 
this  number  would  make  but  a  small  school;  for  the  average  atten- 
dance in  Allamakee  county,  as  well  as  in  the  whole  state,  is  only 
forty  per  cent  of  the  whole  number  of  persons  of  school  age.  But 
while  the  number  of  teachers  should  be  determined  in  part  by  the 
attendance  at  school,  the  number  of  schools  can  net  be  governed 
very  largely  by  it.  When  the  attendance  at  any  school  becomes  top 
large  for  one  teacher,  instead  of  dividing  the  territory  which  may  be 
tributary  to  the  school,  it  is  believed  to  be  a  better  policy  to  employ 
an  additional  teacher  and  grade  the  school,  thus  securing  more 
efficient  instruction.  In  this  way  the  schools  may  be  improved  as 
the  county  becomes  more  populous. 


88  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


F.  M.  Markley  v.  The  District  Township  of  Ludlovv. 

In  the  case  of  Edwards  v.  The  District  Township  of  West  Point, 
appealed  from  Lee  county,  and  published  in  the  School  Journal 
for  April,  1868,  the  following  language  is  used:  "It  is  a  general 
principal  of  law  that  the  exercise  of  discretionary  power  will  not  be 
interfered  with  unless  it  is  fully  apparent  that  such  power  has  been 
abused.  *  *  *  In  changing  sub-district  boundaries  and  locating 
school-houses,  the  law  gives  the  board  of  directors  original  jurisdic- 
tion, and  as  it  is  discretionary  power  the  action  of  the  board  should 
be  affirmed  on  appeal,  unless  it  is  fully  apparent  by  the  evidence 
that  the  hoard  violated  law  or  abused  ^ts  discretion.  If  there  is  a 
reasonable  doubt,  the  board  is  entitled  to  its  beneiit.  The  action  of 
the  board  may  not  be  wholly  approved  by  the  county  superintendent, 
but  if  it  be  not  illegal  or  dearly  unjust,  it  should  be  sustained."  In 
the  case  of  Eastman  v.  The  District  Township  of  Rapids,  decided 
by  the  supreme  court  of  Iowa,  at  the  term  for  December,  186T,  in 
referring  to  the  board  of  school  directors,  the  court  says:  u  These 
local  tribunals  acting  it  is  true  as  the  officers  of  the  district, 
and  yet  personally  disinterested,  must  necessarily  and  properly  while 
within  the  scope  of  those  powers,  be  invested  with  large  discretion, 
and  great  weight  is  deservedly  due  to  their  action.  *  *  *  The 
safe  rule — a  rule  due  alike  to  the  interests  of  the  schools,  and  war- 
ranted by  the  language  and  reason  of  the  law — is  to  sustain  the  local 
tribunals." 

There  is  no  claim  in  this  case  of  illegal  action.  The  refusal  of 
a  board  of  directors  to  form  a  new  sub-district  from  parts  of  four 
sub-districts  which  comprise  four  sections  of  land  each,  arranged 
in  compact  form,  each  sub-district  having  a  school-house  centrally 
located,  is  not  such  an  act  of  injustice  or  such  an  abuse  of  discre- 
tion as  to  justify  the  interference  of  either  the  county  superintend- 
ent or  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction.  This  conclusion 
will  not,  however,  be  understood  as  debarring  the  board  of  directors 
from  forming  such  a  sub-district,  should  its  establishment  to  them 
at  any  time  seen  wise  and  necessary. 

This  decision,  which  is  adverse  to  the  claims  of  personal  friend- 
ship and  sympathy,  is  necessitated  by  a  determination  long  since 
expressed  to  sustain  the  action  of  boards  of  directors  whenever 
such  support  can  be  consistently  given. 

The  administration  of  school  laws  can  be  simplified  and  their 
application  made  uniform  only  by  the  observance  of  such  general 
principles  as  may  be  approved  by  reason  and  experience,  and  to 
such  rules  every  consideration  of  duty  requires  adherence. 

REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

July  8,  1868. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  g9 


E.  S.  Noble  v.  The  Independent  District  of  Marshall. 

E.  S.  NOBLE,  v.  THE  INDEPENDENT  DISTRICT  OF  MAKSHA.LL. 
Appeal  from  Henry  County. 

JURISDICTION:  In  taking  mi  appeal  from  the  decision  of  a  county  superin- 
tendent, the  affidavit  must  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the  superintendent  ot  public 
instruction  before  the  expiration  of  thirty  days  from  the  rendition  of  the  decision 
complained  of. 

In  an  appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  the  filing  of  the  affida- 
vit by  appellant  with  the  county  superintendent,  even  if  done  within  the  time  re- 
quired, is  not  such  a  compliance  with  the  law  as  will  give  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction  jurisdiction  of  the  case. 

In  this  case  an  affidavit  was  tiled  in  the  office  of  the  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction,  April  22,  1868,  bj  H.  Frank, 
president  of  the  independent  district  of  Marshall,  complaining  of 
a  decision  made  by  the  county  superintendent  of  Henry  county, 
February  29,  1868,  by  which  certain  territory  therein  described, 
was  detached  from  said  independent  district  of  Marshall  and 
attached  to  the  district  township  of  Jefferson  in  said  county. 

Palmer  (&  Bill  for  appellant. 

T.    W.  <&  John  /S.    Woolson,  for  appellee. 

On  the  day  set  for  a  final  hearing,  the  counsel  for  appellee  filed 
a  motion  to  dismiss  the  case,  on  the  alledged  ground  that  the  affi- 
davit above  described  was  not  filed  within  the  time  prescribed  by 
law.  On  the  first  page  of  the  affidavit,  reference  is  made  to  the 
decision  complained  of  as  having  been  made  "  on  the  ^  9th  day  of 
March,  1868."  or  less  than  thirty  days  previous  to  the  filing  of  the 
affidavit  with  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  ;  but  a  care- 
iul  examination  of  the  papers  submitted,  shows  this  to  be  a  mistake, 
though  probably  an  unintentional  one.  The  transcript  of  the 
county  superintendent  dates  the  decision  February  29th,  1868. 
The  affidavit  itself  was  subscribed  to  March  25th,  1868,  or  three 
days  before  it  represents  the  decision  complainad  of,  to  have  been 
given.  The  papers  contain  other  evidence  which,  with  that  already 
referred  to,  makes  it  conclusive  that  the  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent  was  rendered  February  29th,  instead  of  March  29th. 

What  was   the  effect   of  the  delay  in  filing  the  affidavit  in  the 

office   of  the  superintendent  of   public  instruction  ?     It  is  proper 

to  examine  this   question  at  the  outset,  for  if  the  delay  was  fatal, 

it  will  be  unnecessary  to  examine  the  merits  of  the  main  question. 

s!2 


90  SCHOOL  L1W  DECISIONS. 


E.  S.  Noble  v.  The  Independent  District  of  Marshall. 

The  first  section  of  an  act  to  provide  for  appeals,  (Kev.  2133, 
school  laws  of  Iowa,  edition  of  1868,  section  124,)  provides  that 
"  any  person  aggrieved  by  any  decision  or  order  of  the  district 
board  of  directors,  in  matter  of  law  or  of  fact,  may,  within  thirty 
days  after  the  rendition  of  such  decision,  or  the  making  of  such 
order,  appeal  therefrom  to  the  county  superintendent  of  the  proper 
county;"  The  succeeding  section  requires  that  "the  basis  of  the 
proceeding  shall  be  an  affidavit,  filed  by  the  party  aggrieved,  with 
the  county  superintendent,  within  the  time  allowed  for  taking  the 
appeal,"  which  the  previous  section  fixes  at  thirty  days.  Another 
section  ("Rev.  2139  ;  or,  school  laws  of  1868,  sec.  130),  provides 
that  "  an  appeal  may  be  taken  from  the  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent,  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  in 
the  same  manner  as  provided  in  this  act,  for  taking  appeals  from 
the  decision  of  the  district  board  to  the  county  superintendent,  as 
nearly  as  applicable,  except  that  he  shall  give  thirry  days'  notice 
of  the  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent,  and  the  like  notice 
shall  be  given  to  the  adverse  party,  and  the  decision  when  made 
shall  be  final."  The  only  exceptions  are,  that  the  time  of  notice 
is  extended  to  thirty  days.  In  all  other  respects,  the  proceedings 
must  conform  "  as  nearly  as  applicable  "  to  the  manner  of  taking 
appeal  to  the  county  superintendent.  As  the  time  within  which 
an  appeal  may  be  taken  from  the  district  board  of  directors  is  lim- 
ited to  thirty  days,  so  the  period  during  which  an  appeal  may  be 
taken  from  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  subject  to 
the  same  limitation. 

The  system  of  appeals  provided  in  the  school  laws,  is  of  statu- 
tory creation,  and  only  such  rights  and  powers  can  be  exercised  in 
relation  thereto,  as  are  specifically  enumerated  in  the  law.  Out- 
side of  the  provisions  of  the  statute,  no  right  of  appeal  can  be 
exercised  by  the  party  aggrieved,  and  no  jurisdiction  can  be 
acquired  by  either  the  county  or  state  superintendent.  Even  if 
a  superintendent  were,  by  consent  of  both  parties,  to  entertain  an 
appeal  in  a  case  in  which  the  right  to  appeal  had  expired  by  lim- 
itation, he  could  not  thereby  acquire  legal  jurisdiction,  and  his 
decision  would  be  without  vitality.  This  view  of  the  law  is  sup- 
ported by  the  language  of  the  supreme  court  in  the  case  of  the 
Stdte  v.  'Mcming,  13  Iowa,  443-4.  In  this  case  an  appeal  came 
up  by  consent  of  the  parties  after  the  expiration  of  the  time  allowed 
by  law  (one  year  there,  instead  of  thirty  days  as  here),  and  the 
opinion  of  the  court  was,  "  if  a  person  fail  to  prosecute  his  appeal 
for  one  year,  such  right  is  forever  at  an  end,  and  this  court  has  no 
power  to  entertain  jurisdiction  of  a  cause  after  the  time  has 
elapsed."  Similar  views  were  expressod  by  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction  in  the  case  of  f unison  <&  Roy  v.  T/ie  District 


SOFTOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  91 


E.  S.  Noble  v.  The  Independent  District  of  Marshall. 


township  of  Wilton,  published  -in  the  School  Journal  for  July, 
1868.  The  conclusion  of  the  matter  is  that  after  the  expiration  of 
thirty  days  from  the  rendition  of  any  decision  or  order  by  a  county 
superintendent,  the  right  of  appeal  therefrom  ceases  to  exist,  and 
the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  can  thereafter  acquire  no 
jurisdiction. 

It  may,  however,  be  said  that  the  affidavit  was  subscribed  to  and 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  county  superintendent  on  the  26th  of 
March,  within  the  thirty  days  allowed  by  law  for  filing  the  affidavit 
with  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction ;  and  this  the  record 
of  the  county  superintendent  shows.  But  the  law  evidently  con- 
templates that  the  affidavit  shall  be  filed  with  the  superintendent 
of  public  instruction  within  the  thirty  days  allowed  by  statute. 
The  law  nowhere  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  county  superintendent 
to  receive  and  forward  such  documents,  and  in  receiving  the  affi davit 
in  this  case  he  merely  acted  as  the  agent  of  the  appellant ;  and  thus 
the  superintendent's  delay  became  the  appellant's  error.  So  far  as 
the  expiration  of  the  right  of  appeal  is  concerned,  the  affidavit  might 
as  well  have  been  in  the  pocket  of  the  appellant,  as  in  the  office 
of  the  county  superintendent,  when  the  law  requires  it  to  be  filed 
with  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction.  Even  the  counsel 
for  appellant  in  discussing  the  subject  of  appeals  from  another 
s'and-point,  says:  "  If  an  appeal  is  given  by  law  from  the  action 
of  the  trustees,  then  it  is  given'  and  if  given,  it  must  be  taken  in 
conformity  with  the  appeals  provided  for  in  other  cases  under  the 
school  law,  and  within  the  same  time;  and,  as  a  consequence,  if 
not  so  taken,  the  bar  arising  from  not  taking  it  is  just  as  complete 
as  if  taking  the  appeal  had  been  neglected."  If  the  law  made  it 
the  official  duty  of  the  county  superintendent  to  forward  affidavits 
of  appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction,  there  might 
possibly  be  some  question  as  to  the  effect  of  delay;  but  under  the 
present  circumstances  there  can  be  none.  We  are  therefore 
compelled  to  hold,  that  in  taking  an  appeal  from  the  decision  or 
order  of  a  county  superintendent,  the  affidavit,  which  is  the  "  basis 
of  appeal,"  must  be  filed  with  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion within  thirty  days  of  the  rendition  of  such  decision. 

Appellant's  motion  is  allowed,  and  for  want  of  jurisdiction  the 
case  is 

DISMISSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  9,  1868. 


92  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Thos.  H.  Moore  v.  The  District  Township  of  Black  Hawk. 


THOS.  H.  MOORE,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF   BLACK  HAWK, 
A.  ARMSTRONG,  Appellant. 

Appeal  from  Jefferson  County. 

SUB-DISTRICT.  Formation  of  from  two  townships.  Sub-districts  can  be 
formed  from  parts  of  two  or  more  district  townships,  only  when  they  are  ren- 
dered necessary  "  by  reason  o(  streams  or  other  natural  obstacles." 

Citizens  of  the  two  district  townships  presented  petitions  to  the 
boards  of  directors  of  the  district  townships  of  Polk  and  Black 
Hawk  in  the  county  of  Jefferson,  asking  their  consent  to  the  form- 
ation of  a  sub-district  from  parts  of  both  district  townships.  This 
consent  Polk  granted  and  Black  Hawk  virtually  refused.  From 
the  refusal  of  Black  Hawk,  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  super- 
intendent, who  reversed  the  action  of  the  board  of  directors,  and 
thus  the  case  comes  up  for  review. 

The  transcript  in  this  case  is  brief,  the  testimony  occupying  only 
two  pages  of  manuscript,  and  that  not  compactly  written.  Among 
the  papers  submitted  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction 
is  a  remonstrance  signed  by  all  the  members  of  the  board  of 
directors  of  the  district  township  of  Black  Hawk,  alleging  that 
there  are  no  "  streams  or  other  natural  obstacles  "  as  contemplated 
in  section  25  of  the  school  laws  of  Iowa,  "  in  the  way  of  any  per- 
sons residing  in  the  territory  of  the  proposed  new  sub-district." 
The  evidence  does  not  show  the  existence  of  "  streams  or  other 
natural  obstacles."  Any  doubt,  however,  upon  this  point  is  removed 
by  the  county  superintendent  himself,  who  in  discussing  the  case 
uses  the  following  conclusive  language:  "  The  country  is  all  prairie 
without  any  streams  which  would  be  likely  to  obstruct  children 
from  attending  school." 

The  county  superintendent  must  certainly  have  overlooked  the 
law  applicable  to  a  case  of  this  kind.  The  first  section  of  the 
school  law  provides  that  each  civil  township  shall  constitute  a 
school-district.  There  is  no  provision  in  the  law  authorizing  the 
formation  of  a  sub-district  from  parts  of  two  or  more  township 
districts,,  except  as  contained  in  section  25  referred  to  above;  and  as 
the  county  superintendent  himself  admits  the  inapplicability  of  the 
conditions  of  said  proviso  to  the  case  in  question,  his  decision  was 
entirely  unwarranted  by  the  statute  and  must  be  overruled.  The 
several  reasons  given  by  the  county  superintendent  are  insufficient  to 
justify  his  decision,  as  it  is  the  duty  of  each  district  township  to 
provide  reasonable  facilities  for  the  education  of  its  own  youth. 

When  a  sub-district  is  formed  from  parts  of  two  or  more  district 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  93 


Elias  Sipple  v.  The  District  Township  of  Lester. 

townships  on  account  of  "  streams  or  other  natural  obstacles,"  the 
law  contemplates  that  it  shall  be  by  the  concurrent  action  of  the 
board  of  directors  and  the  county  superintendent;  hence  there  is 
great  doubt  whether  an  appeal  should  lie  from  the  refusal  of  the 
board  to  give  its  "  consent,"  as  that  would  throw  the  whole  matter 
into  the  hands  of  the  county  superintendent.  The  record,  however, 
in  this  case,  is  too  incomplete  to  base  the  decision  upon  this  point. 

EEVERSED. 

I).  FKANKLIJST  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  13,  1868. 


ELIAS  SIPPLE  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  LESTER. 
Appeal  from  Black  Hawk  County. 

1.  SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES  :  Change  of. — At  the  hearing  of"  an  appeal  before 
the  county  superintendent,  it  is  competent  for  him,  upon  his  own  motion,  to  call 
additional  witnesses  to  give  testimony. 

2.  EVIDENCE  :     Parol. — Can  not  be  received  in  the  absence  of  allegations  of 
fraud,  to  contradict  or  impeach  the  validity  of  school-district  records. 

3.  RECORD  :    The  board  of  directors  may  at  any  time  amend  the  record  of  the 
district,  when  necessary  to  correct  mistakes  or  supply  omissions.  And  may,  upon 
proper  showing,  be  compelled,  by  mandamus,  to  make  such  corrections. 

At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district 
township  of  Lester,  held  September  16,  186T,  which  was  attended 
by  four  of  the  seven  members  of  the  board,  motions  were  made  and 
seconded  for  the  creation  of  two  new  sub-districts  whose  boundaries 
were  described  in  the  motions.  In  regard  to  the  action  on  these 
motions,  the  record  of  the  secretary  contains  merely  the  word 
"carried."  At  a  special  meeting  of  the  board,  held  February  15, 
1868,  the  action  of  the  board  in  September  in  relation  to  the  forma- 
tion of  new  sub-districts  was  "  re-considered  "  and  "rescinded." 
From  the  February  action,  Elias  Sipple  appealed  to  the  county 
superintendent.  During  the  progress  of  the  hearing,  which  took 
place  March  20,  1868,  the  county  superintendent  called  upon  one  of 
the  four  members  of  the  board  that  attended  the  September  meeting, 
who  testified  that  he  did  not  vote  for  the  motion  to  create  a  new  sub- 
district.  As  it  thus  appeared  that  the  new  sub-districts  were  not 
established  by  a  vote  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members  of  the  board, 


94  SCHOOL  L&W  DECISIONS. 


Elias  Sipple  v.  The  District  Township  of  Lester. 

as  required  by  law;  and  as  said  September  action  was  rescinded  at 
a  full  meeting  of  the  board  in  February,  the  county  superintendent, 
considering  the  formation  of  the  sub-districts  illegal  and  void,  dis- 
missed the  appeal.  From  this  decision  Barney  Wheeler  appeals  to 
the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

6r.  Bis  fwp  for  appel'ant. 

cfc  Miller  for  appellee. 


Appel'ant  alleges  substantially  that  the  county  superintendent 
erred  as  follows: 

1.  In  himself  ca'ling  a  witness  to  give  testimony. 

2.  In  receiving  testimony  to  impeach  the  district  record,  which 
is  claimed  to  be  valid  and  binding  after  thirty  days. 

3.  In  dismissing  the  appeal. 

4.  In  not  establishing  the  sub-districts. 

The  law  requires  the  county  superintendent  to  give  a  "just  and 
equitable  "  decision,  and  as  the  calling  of  additional  witnesses  may 
sometimes  enable  him  to  discharge  this  duty  more  faithfully  his 
action  in  this  respect  is  sustained. 

The  second  error  assigned  really  includes  two  distinct  points, 
which  will  be  considered  separately;  and  first,  in  regard  to  the 
impeachment  of  the  district  record.  The  law  provides  for  an  annual 
meeting  of  the  electors  of  the  district  township,  and  for  semi-annual 
and  special  meetings  of  the  board  of  directors;  a'  so  that  '*  the  secre- 
tary shall  record  all  the  proceedings  of  the  board  and  district  meet- 
ings in  separate  books  kept  for  that  purpose."  It  is  a  general  prin- 
ciple of  law  that  "  oral  evidence  can  not  be  substituted  for  any 
instrument  which  the  law  r*  quires  to  be  in  writing,  such  as  records, 
public  documents,"  etc.  (1  Greenleaf's  Evidence,  §86.)  "  It  is  a 
well  settled  rule  that,  where  the  law  requires  the  evidence  of  a 
transaction  to  be  in  writing,  oral  evidence  can  not  be  substituted  for 
that,  sj  long  as  the  writing  exists  and  can  be  produced;  and  this  rule 
applies  as  well  to  the  transactions  of  public  bodies  and  officers  as  to 
those  of  individuals.  (The  People  v.  Zeyst,  23  K  Y.  142.)  In  the 
case  of  Taylor  v.  Henry,  (2  Pick.,  397,)  the  supreme  court  of 
Massachusetts  held  that  an  omission  in  the  records  or  a  town 
meeting  could  not  be  supplied  by  parol  evidence.  Chief  justice  Shaw 
in  discussing  the  case  said  that  it  would  be  "  dangerous  to  admit  such 
proof."  Mr.  Starkie,  in  his  valuable  Treatise  on  Evidence,  says: 
"Where  written  instruments  are  appointed  either  by  the  immediate 
authority  of  the  law  or  by  the  compact  of  the  parties,  to  be  the  per- 
manent repositories  and  testimony  of  truth,  it  is  a  matter  both 
of  principle  and  of  policy  to  exclude  any  inferior  evidence  from 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  95 


Elias  Slpple  v.  The  District  Townshp  of  Lester. 

being  used  either  as  a  substitute  tor  such  instruments  or  to  contra- 
dict or  alter  them  :  of  principle,  because  such  instruments  are,  in 
their  own  nature  and  origin,  entitled  to  a  much  higher  degree  of 
credit  than  that  which  appertains  to  parol  evidence:  of  policy, 
because  it  would  be  attended  with  great  mischief  and  inconvenience, 
if  those  instruments  upon  which  men's  rights  depend  were  liable  to 
be  impeached  and  controverted  by  loose  collateral  evidence." 
(Starkie,  part  IV,  page  995,  vol  III,  3d  Am.  Ed.) 

The  reason  of  the  rule  upon  which  the  courts  agree  with  such 
entire  unanimity,  applies  with  force  in  the  case  now  under  consid- 
eration. The  records  of  the  district  and  board  meetings  contain  a 
statement  of  the  regulations  adopted,  and  the  acts  done  in  the 
exercise  of  the  powers  with  which  the  respective  bodies  are  invested 
by  the  law.  They  present  to  all  the  -citizens  of  the  district  town- 
ship, in  a  permanent  form,  certain  and  definite  information  which 
could  be  obtained,  with  equal  certainty,  in  no  other  way.  Memory 
is  defective,  but  the  secretary  records  the  transactions  as  they  occur. 
The  actors  change  from  year  to  year,  but  the  record  is  permanent. 
And  though  the  admission  of  oral  testimony  to  alter  a  record  or  to 
supply  an  omission  therein,  might  sometimes  promote  the  attain- 
ment of  justice,  the  prevelance  of  such  a  practice  would  result  in 
more  evil  than  good.  It  is  held,  therefore,  that  in  the  absence  of 
alleged  fraud,  the  county  superintendent  errs  in  admitting  parol  evi- 
dence to  contradict  or  impeach  the  record  of  the  September  meeting 
of  the  board  of  directors. 

In  regard  to  the  other  part  of  the  second  point,  a  few  words  will 
suffice.  The  counsel  for  appellant  urges  that  though  the  record  of 
the  September  meeting  was  imperfect,  the  lapse  of  thirty  days  made 
the  record  valid  and  binding  upon  the  district.  It  is  true  that  the 
right  to  take  an  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent  expires  after 
thirty  days ;  but  I  am  unable  to  see  how  the  lapse  of  time  will 
validate  what  was  before  invalid.  The  secretary  is  the  proper  cus- 
todian of  the  records  of  the  school  district,  and  before  the  record  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  board  of  directors  has  been  approved  or 
adopted  by  the  board,  the  secretary  may  amend  them  by  supplying 
omissions,  or  otherwise  correcting  them.  After  they  have  been 
approved,  they  may  be  amended  and  corrected  by  direction  of  the 
board,  even  after  the  lapse  of  thirty  days.  In  Massachusetts  a  town 
clerk  is  permitted  to  amend  the  lecord  in  order  to  supply  defects, 
even  after  a  suit  involving  a  question  respecting  them  has  been  com- 
menced. I  am  of  the  opinion  that  if  the  secretary  or  board  of 
directors  decline  to  make  necessary  corrections  in  the  record,  that  a 
par-'y  interested  may  proceed  by  mandamus  to  compel  the  correc- 
tion. If  the  record  is  to  be  impeached,  it  must  be,  in  the  absence 
of  fraud,  by  a  direct  proceeding  instituted  for  that  purpose,  and  not 


96  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Elias  Sipple  v.  The  District  Township  of  Lester. 

by  a  collateral  or  indirect  method.     The  People  v.  Zeyst,  23  E".  Y., 
147-8. 

The  district  record  in  this  csse  is  not  as  full  as  it  might  with 
propriety  be.  The  law  provides  that  the  boundaries  of  sub-districts 
shall  not  be  changed  except  by  the  vote  of  a  majority  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  board.  The  record  fails  to  show  that  this  requirement 
of  the  law  was  complied  with  at  the  (September  meeting.  The 
secretary  says  the  motion  to  re-district  "carried."  This  is  his  opin- 
ion, but  he  fails  to  give  the  fact  upon  which  it  is  based.  Four  of 
the  seven  members  were  present,  but  he  does  not  say  who  or  how 
many  voted  for  the  change.  Properly  this  should  have  been  stated. 
When,  however,  the  district  record  declares  that  a  motion  was 
"  carried,"  the  law  will  presume  that  it  was  carried  in  accordance 
with  the  requirements  of  the  statute;  though  there  is  reason  to 
believe  th*t  the  presumption  in  this  instance  is  a  violent  one.  It 
follows  that  there  was  no  legal  evidence  that  the  sub-districts  were 
not  established  in  accordance  with  law;  hence,  the  conclusion  is 
inevitable,  that  the  county  superintendent  erred  in  dismissing  the 
appeal  for  the  cause  assigned. 

At  the  commencement  of  the  trial  and  again  during  its  progress, 
the  defendant  moved t  the  coun'y  superintendent  to  dismiss  the 
case  on  account  of  the  insufficiency  of  the  affidavit.  The  affidavit 
of  Mr.  Sipple  is  not  as  full  as  it  is  usual  to  make  affidavits  in  such 
cases,  yet  it  "set  forth  the  errors  complained  of"  with  such 
plainness  and  conciseness  as  enabled  the  county  superintendent  to 
obtain  the  necessary  transcripts,  and  this  is  all  that  the  law  really 
requires.  [Rev.  1860,  §2135.]  It  has  not  been  customary  hereto- 
fore to  enforce  any  particular  form  of  affidavit,  and  the  county  super- 
intendent's ruling  refusing  to  dismiss  on  defendent's  motion  is  sus- 
tained. 

As  the  testimony  appears  not  to  have  been  all  in  when  the  case  was 
dismissed  by  the  county  superintendent  no  opinion  can  be  given  in 
regard  to  the  propriety  or  necessity  of  establishing  the  proposed  new 
sub-districts. 

The  case  is,  therefore,  returned  to  the  county  superintendent  who 
will  proceed  with  the  hearing,  first  allowing  a  reasonable  time  for 
the  correction  of  the  district  record  or  for  the  enforcement  of  its  cor- 
rection, should  such  correctien  be  deemed  necessary  by  either  of  the 
interested  parties.  Should  the  district  record  be  amended  so  as  to 
show  conclusively  that  the  said  sub-districts  were  not  legally  formed 
at  the  said  meeting  in  September,  it  will  follow  that  the  said  sub- 
districts  never  had  a  legal  existence,  and  that  the  plaintiff  could  not 
be  aggrieved  by  the  action  of  the  February  meeting,  hence  the 
county  superintendent  will  determine  the  case  in  favor  of  the  appel- 
lee. Should  said  record  not  be  amended,  or  should  it  be  amended 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  ^  97 


E.  J.  Miner  v.  The  District  Township  of  Cedar. 

so  as  to  show  clearly  that  said  sub-districts  were  established  in  all 
respects  in  comformity  with  law,  the  question  of  establishing  the 
new  sub-districts,  or  more  properly  retaining  their  orgauization,  will 
be  determined  upon  its  merits. 

KEVERSED. 

D.  FBANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  23,  1S6S. 


E.  J.  MINER  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  CEDAR. 
Appeal  from  JFloyd  County. 

1.  COXTEVSTED  ELECTION;  Jurisdiction.    The  proper  method  of  determining  a 
Contested  election  for  school  director  is  by  au  ^action  in  the  nature  ot  quo  icar- 
ranto,  brought  in  the  district  court. 

2.  ELECTION.    Evidence  of .    The  certificate  of  the  officers  of  the  annual  sub- 
district  meeting  is  the  legal  evidence  of  election  as  sub-director,  and  as  a  general 
rule  a  board  of  directors  is  justified  in  declining  to  recognize   a  person  as  a 
member  of  the  board  until  he  produces  such  certificate. 

At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district 
township  of  Cedar,  Floyd  county,  held  March,  1868,  E.  J.  Miner 
appeared  and  tiled  his  oath  of  oltice  as  director  of  sub-district  num- 
ber Three,  of  said  district  township,  and  claimed  recognition  as  a 
member  of  the  board  from  said  sub-district.  The  said  Miner  failed 
to  present  to  the  board  the  certificate  of  the  officers  of  the  sub-district 
meeting  or  any  other  evidence  ot  his  election,  except  his  own  ver- 
bal statement.  It  was  alleged  in  the  board  that  he  was  not  legally 
elected.  Under  these  circumstances,  the  board  refused  him  a  seat 
arid  recognized  his  predecessor  as  holding  over.  From  this  order 
the  said  Miner  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent;  who  after  a 
full  hearing  of  the  manner  in  which  the  election  was  conducted, 
reversed  the  order  of  the  board,  and  directed  that  the  said  Miner 
should  be  recognized  as  director  of  sub-district  number  Three,  and 
as  a  member  of  the  board  of  directors.  From  this  decision  an  appeal 
is  taken  by  A.  J.  Sweet,  president  of  the  board  of  directors.  The 
above  are  but  a  small  portion  of  the  facts  presented  in  the  well- 
arranged  transcript  of  the  county  superintendent,  but  yet  all  that 
are  material  to  the  issues  involved. 

The  case  presented  by  these  facts  is  similar  to  that  of  Ockerman 

s!3 


98 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


E.  J.  Miner  v.  The  District  Township  of  Cedar. 


v.  The  District  Township  of  Hamilton,  published  in  the  School 
Journal  for  September.  1867,  and  must  be  governed  by  the  same 
principles.  It  was  there  held  that  the  only  proper  way  of  deter- 
mining a  contested  school  election  or  the  right  of  exercising  any 
public  office  or  franchise,  is  by  an  action  in  the  nature  of  quo 
warranto  brought  in  the  district  court.  It  seems  unnecessary  to 
repeat  the  arguments  there  used.  Reference  is  made  to  that  case 
as  well  as  to  the  19  Iowa,  199;  18  Iowa,  59;  16  Iowa,  369;  17 
Iowa,  365;  and  the  other  cases  there  cited.  The  principle  involved 
in  the  preceding  references  was  recognized  by  the  couuty  super- 
intendent, when  he  said  in  his  decision  that  "  the  board  of  direct- 
ors has  no  jurisdiction  to  inquire  into  the  legality  of  the  election 
of  its  members."  When  this  just  conclusion  was  reached,  the  case 
should  have  been  dismissed;  for  the  county  superintendent  can 
do  on  appeal  only  what  the  board  itself  might  legally  have  done. 

The  county  superintendent  held  that  as  the  president  of  the 
sub-district  meeting  refused  to  sign  a  certificate  of  election  for  the 
said  Miner,  that  the  board  might  receive  other  evidence  of  his 
election.  In  this,  the  county  superintendent  departed  from  well 
established  legal  principles.  The  school  law  provides  that  at  the 
meeting  of  the  electors  of  the  sub-district  on  the  first  Monday  in 
March,  "a  chairman  arid  secretary  shall  be  appointed,  who  shall 
act  as  judges  of  the  election,  and  give  a  certificate  of  election  to 
the  sub-director  elect"  It  is  a  well  settled  rule  that  where  the  law 
requires  the  evidence  of  a  transaction  to  be  in  writing,  oral  evi- 
dence cannot  be  substituted  for  it,  when  the  writing  can  be  pro- 
duced; and  this  rule  applies  alike  to  the  transactions  of  public 
bodies,  officers,  and  individuals.  This  question  was  discussed  at 
some  length  in  the  case  of  Sipple  v.  The  District  Township  of 
Lester,  and  published  in  the  School  Journal  for  September.  Some 
of  the  references  there  made  are  1  Greenleaf 's  Ev.,  sec.  86;  The 
People  v.  Zeyst,  23  K  Y.,  142;  2  Pick.,  397;  and  Starkie  on  Ev. 
part  iv,  p.  995,  vol.  in.,  3d  Am.  Ed. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  law  contemplates  that  the  certifi- 
cate of  the  officers  of  the  annual  sub-district  meeting,  shall  be  the 
legal  passport  to  a  seat  in  the  board  of  directors ;  and  that,  as  a 
general  rule,  a  board  of  directors  is  justified  in  declining  to  recog- 
nize a  person  as  a  member  of  the  board  until  such  certificate  is 
produced.  If  the  certificate  has  been  given  and  lost,  the  accident 
may  be  remedied  by  other  testimony.  If  it  has  been  illegally 
withheld,  the  officers  may  be  coerced  by  mmdamu?  to  furnish  it. 
If  it  has  been  fraudulently  given,  the  law  still  provides  a  remedy. 

Nor  can  the  public  interests  suffer  by  this  construction  of  the 
law  ;  for  if  there  is  no  election,  or  if  there  is  a  failure  to  qualify, 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  99 


D.  L.  Stone  and  Frank  Loveless  v.  The  District  Township  of  Deerfielcl. 


the  statute  provides  that  the   former  incumbent  in  the    office  of 
director  shall  hold  over  for  another  year. 

By  the  light  of  the  previous  principles,  it  is  evident  that  when, 
under  the  circumstances,  the  county  superintendent  proceeded  to 
investigate  the  rights  of  the  plaintiff  as  a  school  director,  he  ex- 
ceeded his  jurisdiction;  and  that  his  decision  must  therefore  be 
overruled.  The  law  requires  that  the  plaintiff,  Miner,  shall  seek 
his  remedy  in  the  courts. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

July  29,  1868. 


D.  L.  STONE  and  FKANK  LOVELESS,  Appellants,  v.  THE  DISTRICT 
TOWNSHIP  OF  DEEEFIELD. 

Appeal  fro7n  Chickasaw  County. 

1.  SciiooL-H'  >ysE  TAX.     When  voted  by  the  electors  of  a  sub-district  and  duly 
certified  to  the  district  township  meeting  and  to  the  board  of  directors,  must  be 
levied  by  the  board  ;    and  can  only  be  devotea  to  the  specific  purpose  for  which 
it  has  been  voted. 

2.  The  district  township  meeting  may,  in  the  absence  of  any  action  by  the 
electors  of  a  sub-district,  vote  a  tax  to  build  a  school-house  in  such  sub-district. 

3.  CONTINGENT  FUND.      The  use  of  the  contingent  fund  for  the  purpose  of 
building  a  schdol-house  is  unauthorized  by  law  and  is  clearly  illegal. 

The  electors  of  sub-district,  'No.  Seven,  of  this  district  township,  at 
their  annual  meeting  in  March,  1866,  voted  that  seven  hundred 
dollars  should  be  raised  to  build  a  school-house  in  that  sub-district. 
This  vote  was  certified  by  the  secretary  of  this  meeting  to  the  dis- 
trict township  meeting,  which  voted  a  general  school-house  tax  of 
eight  mills.  In  June  of  the  same  year,  a  school-house,  supposed 
to  be  a  temporary  one,  was  erected  in  said  sub-district  by  the 
board  of  directors.  March  28,  1868,  the  board  of  directors  refused 
to  build  a  new  school-house  in  said  sub-district.  From  this  action 
plaintiffs  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who  affirmed  the 
action  of  the  board ;  and  from  his  decision,  appeal  is  taken  to  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

If  the  vote  of  the  sub-district  meeting  had  been  legally  certified 
to  the  district  township  meeting,  the  duty  of  levying  a  tax  for  the 


100  SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


Patrick  Trumble  v.  District  Township  of  Coffin's  Grove. 


specific  purpose  of  building  a  school-house  in  said  sub-district 
would  have  been  obligatory.  Without  such  certification  or  even 
without  any  action  by  the  electors  of  the  sub-district,  the  district 
township  meeting  might  have  voted  a  tax  to  build  a  school-house  in 
any  particular  sub-district;  and  whenever  taxes  are  voted  for  specific 
purposes,  they  should  be  scrupulously  devoted  to  the  objects  for 
which  they  are  raised.  The  evidence  in  this  case  does  not  disclose 
that  a  tax  was  voted  by  the  district  township  meeting,  or  apportioned 
by  the  board  of  directors  for  the  specific  purpose  of  building  a 
school-house  in  said  sub-district  number  Seven.  The  testimony  on 
this  point  is  merely  that  "  the  district  township  meeting  voted  a 
school-house  tax  of  eight  mills." 

But  on  the  assumption  that  a  part  or  all  of  this  "  tax  of  eight 
mills  "  was  intended  to  build  a  school-house  in  number  Seven,  it 
does  not  clearly  appear  that  this  intention  has  not  been  carried  out; 
for  the  same  year  that  the  tax  was  voted,  a  temporary  school-house 
was  built  in  said  sub-district  with  the  contingent  fund.  The  use  of 
the  contingent  fund  for  this  purpose  was  of  course  entirely  unauth- 
orized by  law,  and  its  permanent  use  clearly  illegal.  The  fair  pre- 
sumption is,  that  the  contingent  fund  was  u^ed  for  this  purpose  only 
temporarily,  and  that  it  was  replaced  by  the  school-house  tax  when 
collected.  If  so,  a  part  or  all  of  said  "  tax  of  eight  mills  "  has  been 
virtually  expended  in  the  erection  of  a  school-house  in  sub-district 
number  Seven. 

The  brief  testimony  in  this  case  presents  nothing  which  would 
properly  justify  interference  with  the  action  of  the  board  of 
directors,  or  with  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent. 

AFFIRMED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

August  7,  1868. 


PATRICK  TRUMBLE  v.  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  C  FFIN'S  GKOVE. 
Appeal  from  Delaware  County. 

SUB- DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES  :    The  change  of  sub-district  boundaries  by  the 
board  of  directors  is  a  discretionary  act. 

September  16th,  1867,  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  town- 
ship of  Coffin's  Grove,  Delaware  county,  Iowa,  erected  a  new  sub- 
district  No.  Six,  by  the  division  of  sub-distr.ct  Ne.  One,  which  was 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  1Q1 


Patrick  Trumble  v.  The  District  Township  of  Coffin's  Grove. 

lirst  enlarged  by  the  addition  of  other  territory  thereto.  Patrick 
Trumble  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  by  whom  the  action 
of  the  board  was  reversed.  David  Ayers  now  appeals  from  the 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent. 

No  appearance  for  appellant. 
Patrick  Trumble  for  appellee. 

The  evidence  shows  that  the  sub-district,  previous  to  division,  was 
very  large,  and  was  divided  into  two  nearly  equal  parts  by  a  stream, 
which  in  times  of  high  water  was  impassable  for  footmen,  and 
difficult  for  teams;  that  without  division,  some  children  would  be 
required  to  travel  three  miles  or  more  to  attend  school ;  that  with 
division  a  large  quantity  of  material  which  had  been  collected  to 
build  a  new  school-house,  would  have  to  be  moved  to  another  site  or 
would  be  worthless;  and  that  there  are  upward  of  thirty  children  of 
school  age  in  each  of  the  sub-districts  under  consideration.  The 
testimony  in  regird  to  the  propriety  and  necessity  of  the  change  is 
conflicting.  So  far  as  appears  by  the  record,  the  change  was  legally 
made. 

The  refusal  of  the  county  superintendent  to  dismiss  the  case  on 
account  of  some  technical  objection  to  the  affidavit,  is  sustained ; 
as  the  affidavit  had  sufficient  fullness  to  enable  the  superintendent 
to  obtain  a  transcript  of  proceedings.  (See  Smith  v.  District  Town- 
ship of  Maquoketa.) 

The  county  superintendent,  in  reversing  the  action  of  the  board, 
seems,  to  have  been  governed  by  what  he  considered  the  weight  of 
testimony  in  regard  to  the  change.  But  the  change  of  sub-district 
boundaries  by  the  board  of  directors,  is  a  discretionary  act.  In  the 
exercise  of  this  discretionary  power  by  the  board,  it  does  not  appear 
that  the  law  was  violated,  discretion  abused,  or  injustice  done.  At 
the  date  of  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent,  the  case  of 
Edwards  v.  The  District  Township  of  West  Point,  had  not  been 
published;  but  in  accordance  with  the  principles  therein  stated,  we 
are  compelled  to  set  aside  his  decision  and  sustain  the  action  of  the 
board  of  directors. 

REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

1868. 


102  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Chiles  Moorman  v.  The  District  Township  of  Belmont. 


CHILES  MOOBMAN  v.  THE   DISTRICT   TOWNSHIP   OF   BELMONT,  ELI 
TOWNSEND  Appellant. 

Appeal  from  Warren  County. 

1.  SCHOOL-HOUSE  :    Removal  of.   A  vote  of  the  electors  to  remove  a  school- 
house,  will  not  compel  the  board  to  act  affirmatively  in  relation  thereto. 

2,  JURISDICTION:    An  application  for  an  appeal  filed  within  thirty  days  from 
the  act  of   the  board  complained  of  will  not  give  the*  county  superintendent 
jurisdiction  of  the  case.     The  appeal  must  be  taken  by  affidavit. 

This  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superintendent,  to  secure  the 
removal  of  the  school-house  in  sub-districc  number  Eight,  of  this  dis- 
trict township. 

At  the  annual  sub-district  meeting  in  March,  1868,  the  electors 
voted  by  a  large  majority  that  the  removal  should  be  made.  At  the 
semi-annual  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  held  March  16,  1868, 
a  motion  to  remove  the  school-house  in  accordance  with  the  vote  of  the 
sub-district  was  lost;  and  from  this  action  of  the  board  the  plaintiif,  by 
affidavit  filed  with  the  county  superintendent,  May  9,  1868,  took  an 
appeal.  Previous  to  this,  that  is,  on  the  28th  of  March,  the  plaintiff 
had  filed  with  the  county  superintendent  an  "  application  for  an 
appeal."  The  county  superintendent  assumed  jurisdiction  of  the 
case  and  after  a  full  hearing  reversed  the  decision  of  the  board  and 
ordered  the  removal  of  the  hou^e.  To  this  decision  appellant  takes 
exception. 

Todhunter  &  Williams  for  appellant. 
H.  McNeil  tor  appellee. 

The  power  to  locate  the  site  for  a  school-house  is  vested  in  the 
board  of  directors,  and  the  power  to  "  fix  the  site"  carries  with  it  the 
power  to  relocate  the  site,  Vance  v.  The  District  Township  of  Wil- 
ton, supreme  court  of  Iowa,  December  term,  1867.  Hence  the  vote 
of  the  sub-district  electors  must  be  considered  as  advisory  rather 
than  mandatory. 

Exception  was  taken  to  the  action  of  the  county  superintendent 
on  the  ground  that  the  appeal  was  not  taken  within  the  thirty  days 
required  by  law;  and  the  record  shows  that  nearly  two  months 
elapsed  before  the  filing  of  the  affidavit,  which  by  law  is  made  the 
basis  of  appeal.  It  has  been  decided  in  previous  cases  that  the 
right  of  appeal  can  be  enjoyed  only  within  thirty  days  of  the  rendi- 
tion of  the  decision  complained  of;  and  that  the  appeal  can  be  insti- 
tuted only  by  filing  an  affidavit  with  the  superintendent.  Curry  v. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  1Q3 


Hiram  Hall  v.  The  District  Township  of  Massilon. 

The  District  Township  of  Franklin;  Tunison  &  Roy  v.  The 
District  Township  of  Wilton;  Noble  et  al.  v.  The  Independent 
District  of  Marshall.  Following  the  line  of  these  decisions  we  are 
compelled  to  hold  that  the  county  superintendent  had  no  proper 
jurisdiction  of  this  case,  and  that  his  action  thereon  is  void. 

If  it  is  suggested  that  an  "  application  for  an  appeal "  was  made 
before  the  expiration  of  thirty  days  from  the  board's  decision,  it 
must  be  replied  that  the  law  recognizes  no  such  step  in  the  proceed- 
ings. The  law  distinctly  provides  that  the  basis  of  appeal  shall 
be  "  an  affidavit,  filed  by  the  party  aggrieved  with  the  county  super- 
intendent within  the  time  allowed  for  taking  the  appeal"  The 
application  for  an  appeal  is  all  very  well,  provided  the  affidavit  itself 
is  filed  within  the  time  allowed  by  law;  but  the  filing  of  the  "  appli- 
cation for  an  appeal "  is  an  entirely  superfluous  and  unnecessary 
proceeding.  On  this  point  see  the  note  to  section  124,  school  laws. 

As  the  case  was  not  properly  before  the  county  superintendent, 
we  are  compelled  to  set  aside  his  decision,  and  leave  the  removal  of 
the  school-house  to  the  discretion  of  the  board  of  directors. 

REVERSED. 

D.  FRANKLIN  WELLS. 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

1868. 


HIRAM  HALL  et  al.  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  MASSILON. 
Appeal  from  Cedar  County. 

1.  NOTICE.     The  want  of  notice  is  waived  by  the  voluntary  appearance  of 
the  party  for  any  purpose  connected  with  tlie  cause. 

2.  SUB-DISTRICTS.    The  practice  of  cutting  district  townships  into  numerous 
sub-districts  of  small  size,  is  detrimental  to  the  educational  progress  of  the  state, 
and  will  not  be  sustained  upon  appeal. 

A  petition  was  presented  to  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district 
township  at  the  regular  meeting  in  March,  1868,  prajing  for  the 
erection  of  a  new  sub-district.  Said  petition  was  laid  over  for  con- 
sideration at  the  regular  meeting  in  September.  At  the  latter  meet- 
ing, two  petitions  in  opposition  were  presented.  A  vote  was  had 
upon  the  proposition,  which  resulted  adversely  to  the  formation  of  the 


104  SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


Hiram  Hall  v.  The  District  Township  of  Massiloii. 

new  sub-district — one  vote  being  cast  in  favor  of,  and  five  votes 
being  cast  against  the  same.  From  this  action  of  the  board,  Hiram 
Hall  and  others  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  on  the 
21st  day  of  October,  1868,  made  an  order  forming  the  said  sub-dis- 
trict in  accordance  with  the  prayer  of  the  petition,  and  the  board 
appeal. 

J.  'C.  Logan  for  appellant. 
E.  Brink  for  appellees. 

There  was  a  motion  for  a  continuance  made  on  the  hearing  before 
the  county  superintendent,  based  upon  an  alleged  want  of  notice, 
which  motion  was  overruled,  and  the  parties  proceeded  to  trial.  The 
overruling  of  this  motion  is  one  of  the  errors  assigned  on  this 
appeal. 

The  want  of  notice,  if  there  was  any,  was  waived  by  the  voluntary 
appearance  of  the  party  making  the  motion,  and  as  the  opposite 
party  proposed  to  admit  everything  expected  to  be  proven  in  case  of 
a  continuance  being  granted,  no  injustice  resulted,  and  therefore  this 
error  is  not  sustained. 

The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  will  be  reversed,  how- 
ever, upon  other  grounds. 

The  proposed  new  sub-district  embraces  but  two  and  one-half 
sections  of  land,  inhabited  by  fifteen  families,  having  in  all  but 
twenty-seven  persons  between  the  ages  of  five  and  twenty-one  years ; 
not  enough  to  maintain  a  good  school. 

The  practice  of  cutting  district  townships  into  numerous  sub-dis- 
tricts of  small  size,  is  detrimental  to  the  educational  progress  of  the 
state.  It  increases  the  number  of  schools  and  correspondingly 
reduces  the  number  of  pupils  in  each  school,  by  reason  of  which, 
teachers  of  a  lower  grade  must  be  employed,  poorer  school-houses 
huilt,  or  the  expense  of  carrying  on  the  schools  greatly  increased. 
Experience  has  demonstrated  that  it  is  better  to  have  fewer  sub-dis- 
tricts with  better  school-houses,  and  teachers  of  a  high  standard  of 
qualifications,  than  to  have  more  and  smaller  sub-districts,  poor 
houses,  small  schools,  and  teachers  of  low  grade. 

It  is  impossible  in  country  districts  to  place  a  school  house  in 
every  man's  door-yard — so  to  speak.  Some  must  of  necessity,  be 
more  remote  from  schools  than  others.  From  the  plat  submitted  in 
this  case,  it  appears  the  farthest  any  scholars  residing  within  the 
limits  of  the  proposed  sub-district  have  to  go  to  reach  the  school- 
houses  now  in  use,  is  about  one  and  one-half  miles,  and  this  is  less 
than  the  average  distance  the  children  of  most  sub-districts  in  the 
state  have  to  travel  in  going  to  and  returning  from  school.  See 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  1Q5 


L.  F.  Mullin  v.  District  Township  of  Perry. 

further  the  case  of  Gordon  v.  District  Township  of  Brown,  and 
Markley  v.  District  of  Township  of  Ludlow.  REVERSED. 

LEWIS  I.  COULTER, 

Acting  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
January  27,  1869. 


L.  F.  MULLIN  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  PERRY. 
Appeal  from  Marion  County. 

CONTESTED  ELECTION.  The  right  to  hold  and  exercise  the  office  of  sub-direc- 
tor, in  case  of  contest,  must  be  determined  by  the  district  court,  under  an  infor- 
mation in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warrnto. 

In  December,  1868,  the  county  superintendent  of  Marion  county, 
under  the  provisions  of  section  25,  school  laws,  erected  or  estab- 
lished a  new  sub-district  from  parts  of  Red  Rock  and  Perry  town- 
ships in  said  county,  and  attached  the  same  to  the  latter  as  part  of 
sub-district  number  Three  thereof.  On  the  first  Saturday  in  March 
the  electors  of  this  new  sub-distr  let  held  their  first  annual  meeting, 
at  which  one  L.  F.  Mullin  was  elected  sub-director,  received  the 
proper  certificate  of  election,  and  in  due  time  qualified  as  required 
by  law.  At  the  regular  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors,  Mullin 
appeared,  presented  his  certificate  of  election  and  claimed  his  right 
to  a  seat  as  a  member  of  the  board.  This  claim  was  rejected  and 
to  have  his  right  determined,  he  appealed  to  the  county  superinten- 
dent, who  reversed  the  action  of  the  board  and  declared  Mullin  to 
be  entitled  to  exercise  the  functions  of  sub-director  of  said  sub- 
district. 

From  this  decision,  "W.  H.  Carter,  a  member  of  the  board,  takes 
an  appeal. 

Withrow  &   Wright  for  appellant. 
Stone,  Ay  res  &  Curtis  for  appellee. 

No  effort  was  made  to  disturb  the  order  of  the  county  superin- 
tendent forming  the  new  sub-district,  by  appeal  within  the  time 
prescribed  by  law,  but  the  legality  of  said  order  is  now  for  the  first 
time  attacked  in  this  collateral  proceeding. 


106  SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


Alfred  Harris  v.  District  Township  of  Lee. 

Appellant  insists  that  in  determining  the  right  of  Mullin  to  a 
seat  in  the  board,  the  county  superintendent  should  have  ba^ed  that 
right  upon  the  regularity  and  validity  of  the  proceedings  organiz- 
ing the  sub-district  from  which  Mullin  claimed  to  have  been 
elected.  This  proposition  is  denied  by  the  appellee,  who  claims, 
that  the  opposite  party  having  failed  to  appeal  from  such  order  and 
proceedings  within  thirty  days,  the  sub-district  must  be  considered 
as  a  legal  verity,  and  that  the  only  inquiry  necessary  to  a  proper 
determination  of  the  right  to  a  seat  in  the  board,  is,  as  to  the  regu- 
larity ot  the  election  and  qualification  of  the  person  claiming  the 
right. 

This  appeal  was  taken  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  right 
to  an  office,  and  this  can  only  be  done  by  a  proceeding  in  the 
nafure  of  a  writ  quo  warranto,  or  by  an  information  as  provided  by 
chapter  151,  of  the  Revision  of  1860.  Desmond  v.  McCarthy,  17 
Iowa,  527;  Blackwell  on  Tax  Titles,  117;  Ockerman  v.  Warnock 
&  Worth,  School  Law  Decisions.  The  county  superintendent 
could  not  lawfully  exercise  any  control  over  the  subject  matter  of 
this  case,  and  he  would  therefore  be  incompetent  to  consider  and 
determine  as  to  the  regularity  of  the  proceedings  had  by  him  in 
the  formation  of  the  sub-district,  in  order  to  settle  the  controversy 
between  Mullin  and  the  board  of  directors. 

The  appeal  should  have  been  dismissed  for  want  of  jurisdiction. 

REVERSED. 

A.  S.  KISSELL, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
August  12,  1869. 


ALFRED  HARRIS  v.  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  LEE. 
Appeal  From  Polk  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE  :  Should  be  on  a  public  road,  and  so  located  as  to  be  con' 
venient  and  accessible. 

On  May  4th,  1869,  the  board  of  directors  reversed  its  former 
action  and  located  the  school-house  at  the  "  Hoffman  site."  From 
this  last  crder  Alfred  Harris  takes  an  appeal  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent. On  June  5th,  the  case  was  heard  before  the  county  super- 
intendent, by  whom  the  action  of  the  board  was  reversed  and  the 


SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS.  1Q7 


Jacob  Neal  v.  The  Independent  District  of  Washington. 

house  located  at  what  is  known  as  the  "  Ellyson  site."  From  this 
decision  Thos.  Hoffman  and  E.  F.  Dicks  appealed  to  the  state  super- 
intendent. 

M.  D.  Mcllenry  for  appellants. 
Wm.  Phillips  for  appellee. 

The  counsel  for  appellants  claims  that  the  county  superintendent 
has  no  jurisdiction  in  the  location  of  school-houses,  except  to  reverse 
the  decision  of  the  board  when  it  is  evident  that  it  acted  with  pas- 
sion, prejudice  or  manifest  injustice.  In  support  of  this  view  he 
refers  to  School-Law  Decision :  J.  F.  Edwards •,  et  al.  v.  The  Dis- 
trict Township  of  West  Point. 

The  weight  of  the  testimony  goes  to  show  that  during  the  larger 
part  of  the  school-year  the  Hoffman  location  is  inaccessible  because 
of  snow  and  mud  in  the  lane,  which  is  the  only  road  approaching 
the  school-house  from  the  west,  and  that  most  of  the  school-children 
must  pass  over  this  road  to  get  to  school.  It  is  further  shown  that 
there  is  but  one  road  passing  to  the  Hoffman  site  from  the  west  and 
one  from  the  north,  and  that  both  of  these  roads  are  private  ways. 
From  this  evidence,  manifest  injustice  is  done  to  most  of  the  school- 
attending  population  of  the  sub-district,  and  the  county  superinten- 
dent's decision  in  favor  of  locatiug  the  house  at  the  "  Ellyson  site"  is 
therefore 

AFFIRMED. 

September  23,  1869. 

A.  S.  KISSELL,  ( 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 


JACOB  NEAL  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  WASHINGTON. 
Appeal  From  Appanooose  County. 

INDEPENDENT  DISTRICT.  Cannot  be  formed  from  a  portion  of  an  incorporated 
town  which  contains  less  than  three  hundred  inhabitants. 

The  incorporated  town  of  Moulton  is  one  mile  square,  while  the 
surveyed  plat  is  but  one-half  mile  square.  On  the  24th  day  of 
April,  1869,  a  petition  was  presented  to  the  board  of  directors  of  the 
district  township  of  Washington,  asking  that  said  town  of  Moulton 


108  SCHOOL  IAW  DECISIONS. 


Aaron  Hicks  v.  The  District  Township  of  Pleasant  amlManlua. 


be  organized  as  an  independent  school  district.  The  board  estab- 
lished as  the  boundaries  of  the  proposed  independent  district,  the 
limits  of  the  surveyed  plat.  From  this  action  an  appeal  was  taken 
to  the  county  superintendent,  who  reversed  the  order  of  the  board 
and  made  the  said  independent  district  to  include  all  the  territory 
within  the  limits  of  the  incorporation.  From  this  decision  John 
L.  Hughes  appeals. 

The  evidence  shows  that  at  the  time  the  petition  was  presented 
to  the  board,  there  was  not  the  requisite  number  of  inhabitants  liv- 
ing on  the  surveyed  plat  of  the  town,  but  that  there  were  three  hun- 
dred and  ten  inhabitants  within  the  corporate  limits. 

The  merits  of  the  case  are  with  the  decision  of  the  county  super- 
intendent, which  is  hereby  AFFIRMED. 

A.  S.  KISSELL, 
Superintendent  of  Publie  Instruction. 

October  5,  1869. 


AARON   HICKS,  et  al.  v.  THE    DISTRICT   TOWNSHIP  OF  PLEASANT 

AND  MANTUA, 

Appeal  Jrom  Monroe    County. 

SUB-DISTRICT  :  Composed  of  parts  of  two  townsJiips.  Upon  the  written  appli- 
cation of  two-thirds  of  the  electors  residing  upou  the  te-ritnry  within  the  town- 
ship in  which  the  school-house  is  not  situated,  boards  of  directors  must  divide 
the  sub-district. 

Anderson  and  Stuart  Bros.,  for  appellants. 
Perry  and  Toivnsend  for  appellees. 

This  case  arises  under  the  provision  of  section  38,  of  the  school 
laws  of  1868.  It  appears  from  the  transcript  that  prior  to  March, 
1858,  portions  of  the  civil  townships  of  Pleasant  and  Mantua,  of 
the  county  of  Monroe,  comprised  an  independent  school  district, 
with  the  school-house  erected  in  the  latter.  After  the  taking  effect 
of  the  present  school  law,  this  independent  district  became  a  sub- 
district  in  the  district  township  of  Mantua,  and  has  remained  so 
ever  since,  until  the  making  of  the  order  by  the  county  superintend- 
ent, from  which  this  appeal  is  taken. 

A  petition  signed  by,  what  was  claimed  to  be,  two-thirds  of  the 
electors  residing  in  said  sub-district,  upon  the  territory  lying  in  the 
township  in  which  the  school-house  was  not  situated,  was  presented 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  JQ9 


N.  R.  Hook  v.  The  Independent  District  of  Fremont. 

to  the  respective  boards  of  directors  of  the  said  district  township, 
praying  said  boards  to  divide  said  sub-district  upon  the  township  line, 
and  restore  the  territory  thereof  to  the  district  townships  to  which  it 
geographically  belonged.  The  action  of  each  board  was  averse  to 
the  prayer  of  the  petition,  and  from  which  an  appeal  was  taken  to 
the  county  superintendent,  who  reversed  the  action  of  the  boards, 
and  ordered  the  division  to  be  made.  The  case  has  been  presented 
to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  on  the  appeal  of  Jesse 
Palmer  and  others. 

The  only  question  presented  before  the  county  superintendent, 
and  here,  was  :  Did  the  petition  contain  the  names  of  two-thirds  of 
the  electors  as  required  by  law  ?  This  question,  answered  in  the 
affirmative,  it  is  conceded  that  the  boards  of  directors  had  no  discre- 
tion in  the  matter,  but  it  was  their  duty  upon  the  reception  of  such 
petition,  to  divide  the  sub-district,  and  make  the  boundary  lines  be- 
tween the  district  townships  conform  to  the  line  dividing  the  civil 
townships. 

In  my  opinion  the  testimony  establishes  the  fact  that  the  petition 
presented  to  the  boards  of  directors,  did  contain  the  names  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  electors  residing  in  that  portion  of  the  sub-district  lying 
in  Pleasant  township,  and  that  the  boards  of  directors  of  the  two 
townships  aforesaid,  should  have  granted  the  prayer  of  the  petition. 
Therefore  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is 

AFFIRMED. 
A.  S.  KISSELL, 
Superintendent  of   Public  Instruction. 

March  11,  1870. 


N.  R.  HO<>K  v.  THE  INDEPENDENT  DISTRICT  OF  FREMONT. 
Appeal  from  MahasJca  County. 

RESIDENCE.    Is  not  acquired  by  temporary  removal  to  a  place  for  the  purpose 
of  attending  school. 

Lacey  <&  Shepherd,  for  appellant. 
L.  M.  Miller,  for  appellee. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  the  independent  district 
of  Fremont  held  on  the  27th  day  of  February,  1870,  an  order  was 
made  expelling  one  George  Check  from  the  school  in  said  district. 
From  this  order  of  the  board  Dr.  N.  li.  Hook,  with  whom  the  boy 


HO  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Z.  W.  Remington  v.  The  District  Township  of  Boomer. 

— Check — was  at  the  time  living,  appealed  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent, who  affirmed  the  order  of  the  board,  and  Hook  again  ap- 
pealed. 

The  ground  upon  which  the  boy  was  dismissed  from  school,  was 
that  he  was  not  a  bona  fide  resident  of  the  independent  district  of 
Fremont,  and  this  is,  as  I  think,  fully  sustained  by  the  circumstances 
of  the  case  as  shown  by  the  weight  of  the  evidence  adduced  before 
the  county  superintendent.  The  apparent  primary  purpose  of 
George  Check  in  g  >ing  to  live  with  Dr.  Hook,  was  that  he  might 
attend  the  school  in  Fremont,  arid  after  the  term  of  school  should 
expire,  his  further  continuance  at  Hook's  would  be  uncertain.  He 
did  not  go  there  with  the  intention  of  remaining,  but  the  intention 
to  return  to  his  father's  house  seems  to  have  been  manifested  in  the 
contract  or  agreement  made  with  Hook. 

Counsel  for  appellant  argue  that  the  law  should  riot  be  technically 
construed,  but  that  it  should  receive  a  liberal  construction,  and  in 
this  he  is  correct.  It  should  receive  such  a  construction  as  that  all 
the  youth  of  the  state,  without  regard  to  race  or  condition  in  life, 
can,  with  equal  faci  ity,  partici,  ate  in  the  benefits  of  our  fiee 
schools.  There  is  evidence  that  the  schools  in  Fremont  are  so 
crowded  that  many  of  the  youth  of  the  district  are  unable  to  gain 
admission,  and  the  law  gives  to  them  the  prior  claim.  The  board 
should  see  that  the  children  of  the  district  are  first  accommodated, 
and  then,  if  not  detrimental  to  the  interests  of  the  school,  they  may 
admit,  in  their  discretion,  those  from  outside  distiicts  upon  such 
terms  as  they  may  agree. 

Believing  that  the  county  superintendent  properly  sustained  the 
board  of  directors,  his  decision  is  herebv  AFFIRMED. 

A.  S.  KISSELL, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

May  1,  1870. 


Z.  W.  REMINGTON  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TUWNSHIP  OF  BOOMER. 
Appeal  from  Pottawattamie  County. 

1.  JURISDICTION.    The  county  superintendent  has  not  jurisdiction  of  cases 
involving  a  mouey  demand. 

2.  ORDERS.     When  improperly  issued  by  the  board  of  directors,  the  proper 
remedy  is  an  icj  unction  from  the  civil  courts. 

The  case  presented  by  the  record  is  this:  On  the  12th  day  of 
October,  the  board  of  directors  of  Boomer  district  township  met  in 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Daniel  Forker  v.  The  District  Township  of  Eichrnond. 


special  session  and  made  a  settlement  with  one  L.  S.  Axtell,  who 
was  the  contractor  for  the  erection  of  certain  school-houses  in  said 
district  township.  From  the  action  of  the  board,  Z.  W.  Remington 
appealed  to  the  county  superintendent.  .  The  superintendent  dis- 
missed the  appeal  upon  the  ground  that  the  settlement  with  Axtell 
was  for  a  money  demand,  and  therefore  involved  a  question  over 
which  he  could  exercise  no  jurisdiction.  Remington  again  appeals. 

If  there  was  anything  wrong  in  the  action  of  the  board  issuing 
orders  in  favor  of  Axtell  for  the  payment  of  his  claim  for  building 
the  school-houses  that  would  render  them  invalid,  plaintiff's  remedy, 
if  any,  would  have  been  by  injunction  to  restrain  the  payment  of 
such  orders,  or  by  some  other  proper  action  in  the  civil  courts,  and 
not  by  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent,  as  the  latter  tribunal  is 
not  clothed  by  the  statute  with  authority  to  inquire  into  or  deter- 
mine the  validity  of  school  orders.  The  county  superintendent, 
therefore,  very  properly  decided  to  dismiss  the  appeal  and  his  order 
in  the  case  is  hereby 

AFFIRMED. 
A.  S.  KISSELL, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

May  17,  1870. 


DANIEL  FOEKER,  et  al.  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP   OF  RICHMOND. 
Appeal  from  Tama  County. 

SCHOOL  HOUSE  TAX:  When  by  successive  apportionments,  Hie  rate  of  school 
house  tax  throughout  the  sub-districts  of  the  township  has  been  rendered  uni- 
form, a  uniform  rate  should  be  maintained. 

This  is  a  case  in  which  the  board  of  directors  of  aforesaid  town- 
ship apportioned  a  school-house  tax,  unequally,  among  the  sub- 
districts  of  the  district  township,  from  which  order  the  appellees 
appealed  to  the  counry  superintendent,  Avho  reverses  the  board's 
order,  and  the  latter  then  appeals  to  this  tribunal. 

Stivers  <£  Sofely  for  appellant. 

Struble  &  Bradshaw  for  appellees. 

The  evidence  in  the   transcript  shows   that   the  school-house  and 


U2  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Aaron  Pryne  v.  The  District  Township  of  York. 


contingent  fund  taxes  were  unequally  and  irregularly  levied,  pre- 
vious to  the  levy  of  1869,  but  for  the  latter  year  the  board  appor- 
tioned the  school-house  tax  equally  among  the  different  sub-districts 
in  the  district,  according  to  sec.  16  and  note  (f),  school  laws,  1868. 

The  county  superintendent  claims,  for  this  and  other  valid  and 
equitable  reasons,  that  the  board  ought  to  have  apportioned  the 
school-house  tax  for  1870,  in  accordance  with  the  precedent  which 
they  established  in  1869;  and  we  can  see  no  good  reason,  in  equity 
or  justi  e,  why  his  decision  ought  to  be  reversed. 

AFFIRMED. 
A.  S.  KISSELL, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
August  1,  1870. 


AARON  PRYNE  v.    THE   DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  or  YORK. 
Appeal  from  Tama  County. 

SUB-DISTRICT.  Composed  of  parts  of  two  townships.  Upon  the  written  app'i- 
cation  of  two-thirds  of  the  electors  residing  upon  the  territory  within  the  town 
ship  in  which  the  school-house  is  not  situated,  boards  of  directors  must  divide 
the  sub  district. 

Preceding  1858,  a  school  district  was  erected  from  territory 
located  in  York  township,  Tama  county,  and  Kane  township,  Benton 
county.  Subsequently,  this  district  formed  a  sub-district,  with  its 
school-house  located  in  York  township,  in  aforenamed  county,  accord- 
ing to  section  38,  school  laws,  1868.  At  a  joint  meeting  of  the  boards 
of  the  district  townships  of  Kane  and  York,  March  26th,  1870,  two- 
thirds  or  more  of  the  electors  residing  on  the  territory  located  in 
Kane  township,  and  attached  to  York  township  for  school  purposes, 
petitioned  the  boards  to  concur  in  setting  back  such  territory  to  the 
township  of  Kane.  The  board  of  the  latter  district  granted  the 
request  of  the  petitioners,  but  that  of  the  district  township  of  York 
refused.  From  the  order  of  the  latter,  Aaron  Payne  appeals  to  the 
county  superintendent  who  reverses  the  board's  decision.  L.  P. 
Winterstein  then  appeals  to  this  tribunal. 

No  appearance  fur  appellant  or  appellee^ 

The  case  is  purely  one  of  law,  as  suggested  by  the  county  super- 
intendent. The  transcript  clearly  shows  that  the  petitioners  had 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


C.  S.  Boynton  v.  District  Township  of  Lodomilio. 


complied  with  section  38,  school  laws,  1868,  (Aaron  Hicks,  et  al.,  v. 
Distric:  Townships  of  Pleasant  and  Mantua.}  The  county  super- 
intendent's decision  of  therefore 

AFFIRMED. 

A/.  S.  KISSELL, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
October  7,  1870. 


C.  S.  BOYNTON  v.  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  LODOMILLO. 
Appeal  from  Clayton  County. 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  TAX.  If  the  district  township  meeting  neglects  or  refuses  to 
vote  the  sum  certified  as  determined  by  the  electors  of  a  sub-district  for  school- 
house  purposes,  or  a  sum  adequate,  it  'is  the  duty  of  the  board  to  apportion  such 
sum  among  ihe  several  sub-districts  as  justice  n  quires. 

The  facts  are  these: 

The  electors  of  sub-districts  numbers  One,  Four,  and  Seven,  of 
the  district  township  of  Lodomilio,  Clayton  county,  Iowa,  at  their 
regular  meeting  in  March,  1870,  determined  upon  certain  sums  as 
necessary  for  the  payment  of  debts  resting  on  their  respective 
school-houses,  and  certified  the  same  to  the  next  regular  meeting  of 
the  electors  of  the  district  township  of  Lodomilio.  The  electors  of 
said  district  township  meeting,  neglected  to  vote  said  amounts.  The 
board  of  directors  at  their  regular  meeting  in  March,  1870,  pro- 
ceeded to  levy  a  tax  of  one-fourth  of  a  mill  on  the  entire  district  as 
voted  by  the  district  township  meeting,  and  a  tax  directly  on  each 
of  said  sub-districts  according  to  such  rate  per  centum  as  in  their 
judgment  would  meet  the  exigencies  of  each  sub-district.  From 
this  action  of  the  board  an  appeal  was  taken  by  C.  S.  Boynton  to 
the  county  superintendent,  who  sustained  the  action  of  the  board, 
from  whose  decision  said  C.  S.  Boynton  appeals  to  the  superintend- 
ent of  public  instruction. 

From  the  testimony  in  this  case  it  is  evident  that  the  only  point 
to  be  decided  is  whether  the  board  erred  in  levying  the  amount  of 
tax  asked  for  by  the  sub-districts  directly  on  the  sub-districts  them- 
selves, instead  of  apportioning  it  among  the  sub-districts  of  the 
township. 

The  law  is  pla'n  on  this  subject.  The  5th  specification  under 
section  7,  school  laws  of  Iowa,  explicitly  empowers  the  elec'ors  of  a 

BlS 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Richard  Huskins  v.  The  District  Township  of  Fremont. 


district  township  meeting  legally  assembled  to  vote  a  tax  on  the  tax- 
able property  of  the  district  township,  such  as  the  meeting  shall 
deem  sufficient  for  the  purchase  of  grounds,  construction  of  school- 
houses,  payment  of  debts  contracted  in  the  construction  of  school- 
houses,  etc.  Failing  to  do  so,  it  was -obviously  the  duty  of  the  board 
of  directors  to  apportion  the  amount  asked  for  by  the  said  sub-dis- 
trict among  the  several  sub-districts  of  the  township.  If  in  the 
judgment  of  the  board  the  amount  asked  for  was  greater  than  the 
exigencies  of  the  sub- district  required,  provision  is  made  for  levying 
the  excess  directly  on  the  sub-distiict  making  the  request.  In  gen- 
eral, the  whole  amount  necessary  to  erect  school-houses,  or  pay  debts 
contracted  in  erecting  school-houses,  must  be  apportioned  among 
the  sub-districts  of  the  district  township,  subject  only  to  such  restric- 
tions as  are  found  in  sections  12  and  28,  school  laws  of  Iowa. 

The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  therefore 

REVERSED. 
A   S.  KISSELL, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

October  8, 1870. 


RICHARD  HUSKIES,  et  al.  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  FREMONT. 
Appeal  from  Johnson  County. 

SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES. — It  requires  an  affirmative  vote  of  a  majority  of 
all  tlie  members  ot  the  board  to  effect  a  chaiige  in  sub-district  boundaries. 

The  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of  Fremont,  John- 
son county,  Iowa,  passed  an  order  erecting  a  new  sub-district,  to  be 
called  number  Eight,  from  parts  of  numbers  Three  and  Six  of  said 
district  township.  From  this  order  Richard  Huskins  et  al.  appealed 
to  the  county  superintendent,  who  entertained  a  hearing  of  the  case 
upon  its  merits,  and  after  visiting  the  territory,  rendered  a  decision 
affirming  the  action  of  the  board.  From  this  decision  said  Richard 
Huskins  takes  an  appeal  to  this  tribunal. 

Richard  Huskins,  Pro  Se. 

J.  D.  Tewplin  db  Son,  for  appellets. 

From  the  transcript  it  appears  that  in  course  of  the  trial  before 
the  county  superintendent,  the  fact  was  developed  that,  of  the  six 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


W.  D.  Peck  v.  The  District  Township  of  Polk. 


members  constituting  the  board  of  directors,  but  four  were  present 
at  the  special  meeting  called  for  the  purpose  of  changing  the  district 
boundaries,  and  that  of  these  four,  only  three  voted  for  the  order 
erecting  the  new  sub-district. 

During  the  trial,  a  motion  was  made  to  dismiss  the  case  on  the 
ground  of  alleged  illegality  of  the  action  of  the  board,  as  not  in 
compliance  with  the  provision  of  section  31,  of  the  school  laws  ot 
Iowa.  Said  motion  was  overruled  by  the  county  superintendent, 
on  the  assumption  that  said  section,  when  properly  interpreted, 
requires  simply  an  affirmative  vote  of  a  legally  constituted  quorum 
of  the  board  at  a  meeting  lawfully  called,  for  the  purpose  of  chang- 
ing the  boundaries  of  a  district,  and  not  an  affirmative  vote  of  a 
majority  of  the  whole  board.  The  whole  case  turns  upon  the  decis- 
ion of  this  point. 

In  the  case  of  James  S.  Dupray  v.  The  District  Township  of 
Franklin,  Bremer  county,  Iowa,  (School  Journal,  April,  1870,  p. 
202),  a  decision  was  rendered  by  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion, in  accordance  with  such  an  interpretation  of  section  31  as  makes 
it  require  an  affirmative  vote  of  the  majority  of  all  the  members  of 
the  board  to  effect  a  change  in  district  boundaries.  See  also  note 
(b)  to  section  24,  school  laws  of  Iowa.  The  testimony  shows  that 
the  resolution  ordering  the  erection  of  a  new  sub-district  did  not 
receive  the  legal  number  of  votes  required  to  secure  its  adoption,  and 
the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  therefore 

AFFIRMED. 
A.  S.  KISSELL, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

November  21,  1870. 


W.  D   PECK,  et  al.  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  POLK. 
Appeal  from  Jefferson  County. 

1.  SUB-DISTRICTS. — Should  be,  if  possible,  compact  and  regular  in  form;  and 
in  well  populated  district  townships,  two  miles  square   is  considered  a  desirable 
area  lor  each  sub-district. 

2.  SCHOOL  HOUSE  SITE. — It  is  important  that  the  school-house  site  be  located 
on  a  public  road,  and  as  nearly  as  practicable  at  the  geographical   center   of  the 
district. 

It  appears  from  the  transcript  in  this  case  that  the  board  of  direc- 
tors of  Polk  township,  Jefferson   county,  on    the  presentation  of  a 


SCHOOL   LA.W   DECISIONS. 


W.  D.  Peck  v.  The  District  Township  of  Polk. 


petition  from  the  majority  of  the  inhabitants  of  sub  district  number 
Eight,  of  said  district  township,  issued  an  order  attaching  a  strip  on 
the  northeast  from  sub-district  number  Seven  to  number  Eight, 
re-locating  the  school-house  site,  and  arranging  for  the  removal  of 
the  school-house  from  the  present  site  to  said  new  location.  From 
this  action  of  the  board  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent, who  sustained  the  action  of  the  board  ;  and  from  his  decis- 
ion an  appeal  is  taken  to  this  tribunal. 

McCoid  and  Heron,  for  appellants. 
M.  B.  Sparks,  for  appellees. 

The  trial  before  the  county  superintendent  developed  that  the 
board  of  directors  of  Polk  township  have  in  contemplation  the  re- 
districting  ol  the  entire  township  into  sub-districts  two  miles  square, 
and  tli at  the  order  providing  for  the  change  of  boundaries  in  sub- 
district  number  Eight,  is  the  initiatory  step  in  that  direction.  The 
sub-district  in  question,  previous  to  their  order,  had  very  inegu'ar 
boundaries;  and,  except  that  the  district  is  too  large  for  convenience 
without,  further  change  in  the  boundaries,  there  would  seem  to  be 
every  reason  for  attaching  the  strip  from  number  Seven.  That 
being  attached,  the  change  of  location  and  the  removal  of  the  school- 
house  to  a  site  occupying  the  geographical  center  of  the  sub-district 
with  its  changed  boundaries,  must  lollow  of  course.  Besides  this, 
there  seems  to  be  the  additional  good  reason  fora  change  of  location 
for  the  school-house  site;  the  present  site  is  not  on  a  public  road— 
the  one  in  prospect  is,  and  as  all  the  territory  is  in  a  condition  to  be 
easily  and  rapidly  settled,  the  new  site  will,  with  the  additional 
change  in  contemplation,  be  the  exact  geographical  center  of  the 
sub-district. 

The  action  of  the  board  in  this  case  is  manifestly  of  a  discretionary 
character,  and  I  can  see  nothing  in  the  testimony  that  would  induce 
the  belief  that  they  have  in  any  way  exceeded  their  prerogative,  or 
abused  their  discretion.  The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent 
is  therefore 

AFFIRMED. 


February  4,  1871. 


A.  S.  KISSELL, 
Superintendent  of  Public  lnstructi<  n 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  H7 


Daniel  Kane  v.  The  District  Tawnship  of  Emmetsburg. 


DANIEL  KANE,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  EMMETSBTJKO. 
Appeal  from  Palo  A  llo  County. 

1.  SUB -DIRECTOR.    It  is  the  duty  ot  the  sab-director,  to  negotiate  and  make 
in  his  sub-district,  contracts  for  employing  teachers,  under  such  rules  and  regula- 
tions as  the  board  may  prescribe  not  inconsistent  with  law. 

2.  CONTRACT:    Approval  of  by  president.    It  is  the  duty  of  the  president  to 
approve  the  contract  made  by  the  sab-director  with  a  teacher,  if  made  in  accord- 
ance with  the  rules  and  regulations  established  by  the  board. 

Daniel  Kane,  sub-director  of  sub-district  number  Two,  in  the  dis- 
trict township  of  Ernmetsburg,  Palo  Alto  county,  employed  one 
Henry  L.  Burnell  as  teacher  in  said  sub-district,  and  drew  up  a 
written  contract  with  him.  On  presenting  said  contract  to  the  pres- 
ident of  the  board  he  refused  to  sign  it.  At  a  special  meeting  of  the 
board  of  directors,  held  on  the  29th  of  November,  1870,  the  contract 
of  the  sub-director  with  said  Henry  L.  Burnell  was  ignored,  and  an 
order  was  issued  to  enter  into  a  contract  with  one  M.  M.  Lord,  as  teacher 
of  the  school  in  said  sub-district.  From  this  action  of  the  board 
Daniel  Kane  and  Henry  L.  Burnell  appealed  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent, who  reversed  the  action  of  the  board,  and  from  his  decision 
Win.  E.  Cullen,  president  of  the  board,  appeals  to  this  depart- 
ment. 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  established  practice  of  the  board  in 
the  matter  of  hiring  teachers,  their  proceedings  were  manifestly  ille- 
gal when  they  assumed  to  delegate  to  the  sub-director  a  power  with 
wlii eh  the  statute  most  explicitly  clothes  him,  to  wit,  that  of  con- 
tracting with  a  teacher  to  take  charge  of  the  school  in  his  sub-dis- 
trict. Section  47,  echool  laws  of  Iowa,  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  sub- 
director  to  "negotiate  and  make  in  his  sub-district  all  necessary 
contracts  for  providing  fuel,  employing  teachers,  etc.,"  and  the  sig- 
nature of  the  president  and  the  approval  of  the  board  to  contracts 
made  in  conformity  with  provisions  of  that  section  are  by  the  same 
section  made  imperative,  unless  some  reason  that  would  be  valid  in 
law  can  be  given  for  withholding  suoh  acquiescence.  !Nb  such  rea- 
son is  assigned  in  the  testimony  ;  and  the  board  evidently  rests  the 
main  stress  of  its  defense  upon  the  practice  alleged  to  be  uniform  in 
their  proceedings  of  delegating  to  the  sub-director  the  power  to  con- 
tract with  a  teacher  for  his  sub-district.  Such  practice  is  manifestly 
illegal.  Moreover  when  the  said  board  issued  an  order  to  enter 
into  contract  with  M.  M.  Lord  as  teacher  for  said  sub-district,  it  was 
manifestly  transcending  its  prerogatives  and  taking  upon  itself  the 
duties  of  the  suh-dir^ctor.  It  is  clear  from  the  transcript  that  all  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Wm.  Bleckley  v.  The  District  Township  of  Cedar. 


allegations  of  affiants,  Daniel  Kane  and  Henry  L.  Burn  ell,  of  illegal 
proceedings  on  the  part  of  the  board  are  well  sustained,  and  the 
decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is  therefore 

AFFIRMED. 
A.  S.  KISSELL, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
April  7,1871. 


WM  BLBCKLY,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  CP.DAR. 
Appeal  from  Floyd  County. 

BOARD  OP  DIRECTORS:  Appeal  from  order  of.  The  board  should  be  sustained 
upon  appeal,  ut. less  they  have  violated  law,  abused  their  discretionary  power,  or 
have  acted  with  manifest  ir. justice. 

On  the  31st  day  of  October,  1870,  the  board  of  directors  of  the 
district  township  of  Cedar,  Floyd  county,  changed  the  boundaries 
of  sub-district  number  Two,  of  said  district  township,  located  a  site 
for  a  school-house  in  said  sub-district,  on  the  S.  W.  corner  of  the  north 
half  of  the  S.  W.  quarter  of  section  nineteen,  in  said  district  town- 
ship,und  contracted  for  the  erection  of  a  school-house  on  said  site. 
From  the  action  of  the  board  locating  the  -school-house  site,  Wm. 
Bleckly  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  upon  trial  of 
the  case,  reversed  said  action,  and  fixed  the  site  at  corner  of  section 
thirty,  in  sub-district  number  Two,  of  said  district  township,  where- 
upon A.  J.  Sweet,  president  of  the  board  of  directors,  appeals  to  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

It  is  not  apparent  from  the  transcript  that  there  is  any  special 
grievance  in  the  case.  There  is  a  controversy  between  the  board 
and  certain  parties  residing  in  the  sub-district,  respecting  two  sites 
at  no  great  distance  apart,  and  both  on  public  roads,  and  alike  easy 
of  access.  The  only  point  fairly  in  litigation  in  the  case,  is  the  rela- 
tive dryness  of  these  respective  localities ;  and  so  conflicting  is  the 
testimony,  and  so  evenly  balanced  are  the  statements  for  and  against 
both  bites,  that  in  the  absence  of  more  satisfactory  evidence,  I  am 
compelled  to  conclude  there  is  no  great  difference  between  them. 
The  law  provides  that  unless  there  be  some  clearly  established 
point  of  grievance,  making  it  manifest  that  the  board  has  abused  its 
discretion,  its  action  in  locating  school-house  sites  shall  be  sus- 
tained. I  am  compelled,  notwithstanding  the  judgment  of  the 
county  superintendent  to  the  contrary,  to  decide  from  the  transcript 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  H9 


Geo.  Recller  v.  The  District  Township  of  Jefferson. 

that  there  is  not  sufficient  evidence  in  the  case  to  make  it  clear  that 
the  board  has  abused  its  discretion.  The  decision  of  the  county 
superintendent  is  therefore 

REVERSED. 
A.  S.  KISSELL, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
April  26,  1871. 


GEO.  RSDLER,  et  al.,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  JEFFERSON. 
Appeal  from  Dubuque  County. 


STKICTS:  The  division  of  a  large  and  populous  district  township,  into 
but  four  sub-districts,  is  not  such  division,  as  justice  and  the  interests  of  the 
people  require. 

The  facts  are  these  :  At  a  special  meeting  of  the  board  of  direc- 
tors held  January  19th,  1871,  a  petition  from  certain  citizens  of  sub- 
district  number  Three,  in  the  district  township  of  Jefferson,  Du- 
buque  county,  was  presented  praying  for  a  change  of  boundaries  of 
sub-district  numbers  Three,  and  Four,  and  the  formation  thereby  of 
a  new  sub-district  to  comprise  sections  twenty-two,  twenty-seven, 
and  thirty-four,  in  the  township  aforesaid.  The  board  refused  to 
grant  said  petition,  and  from  this  action,  George  Redler,  et  al.,  ap- 
pealed to  the  county  superintendent,  who  reversed  said  action,  and 
in  compliance  with  the  request  of  petitioners  erected  a  new  sub- 
district,  from  portions  of  numbers  Three  and  Four,  as  before  named. 
From  this  proceeding  Richard  Alderson,  in  behalf  of  the  board 
appeals  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

The  testimony  of  a  full  transcript  goes  to  show  that  there  is  urgent 
necessity  for  some  such  re-districting  as  the  petitioners  eeek.  Sec- 
tion 24  school  laws  of  Iowa,  makes  it  imperative  on  boards  of  direc- 
tors to  divide  their  townships  into  sub-districts,  such  as  justice  and 
equity  and  the  interests  of  the  people  require,  and  when  it  appears 
in  evidence  that  the  largest  and  most  populous  township  in  the 
county  of  Dubuque,  with  a  school  population  of  642  children,  has- 
but  four  sub  districts,  and  very  inadequate  school  accommodations, 
some  of  the  children  having  over  four  miles  to  go  to  get  to  school, 
and  some  of  them  cut  off  entirely  from  school  privileges,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  resist  the  inference  that  the  board  in  refusing  to  erect  a  new 
sub-district  in  the  territory  aforesaid,  have  not  fully  considered  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


A.  A.  Prinyer  v.  The  District  Township  of  Hardin. 


duty  imposed  upon  them  in  the  above  statutory  provision.  More- 
over, it  appears  from  the  plat  of  the  territory  furnished  to  this  office, 
that  the  configuration  of  land  is  such,  that  the  way  to  school  for 
certain  portions  of  inhabitants  of  number  Four,  both  to  their  own 
school-house,  and  to  that  of  number  Three,  is  largely  obstructed  by 
streams,  and  bluffs,  making  it  especially  urgent  that  a  new  sub- 
District  be  erected  between  the  sub-districts,  as  requested  by  peti- 
tioners. These  are  deemed  sufficient  reasons  for  reversing  the  ac- 
tions of  the  board,  and  sustaining  the  order  of  the  county  superin- 
tendent, in  erecting  the  sub-district  as  aforesaid. 

AFFIRMED. 

A.  S.  K1SSELL, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
May  3,  1871. 


A.  A.  PRINTER  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  HARDIN. 
Appeal  from  Greene  County. 

1.  EVIDENCE  :  Orcd.    Not  adinissable  when  written  is  obtainable. 

2.  SCHOOL  HOUSE  SITE.    Should  be  in  center  of  sub-district  when  practicable. 

3.    .    Location  of,  a  discretionary  act  and  should  be  sustained  on  appeal 

unless  manifestly  unjust. 

The  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of  Hardin,  Greene 
county,  on  the  20rh  day  of  March,  1871,  voted  to  remove  the  school- 
house  to  the  center  of  the  original  sub-district  number  Two,  from 
which  action  A.  A.  Prinyer  successively  appeals  to  the  county  super- 
intendent and  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

H.  C.  Rippey,  for  appellant. 
Jackson  <&  Potter,  for  appellees. 

In  the  record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  board  as  certified  in  the 
secretary's  transcript  it  is  stated  "  that  it  was  voted  that  the  school- 
house  in  sub-district  number  Two  be  moved  to  the  center  of  the 
original  district."  An  attempt  is  made  in  the  trial  before  the  county 
superintendent  by  affiant's  counsel  to  make  an  issue  on  the  legal 
boundaries  of  sub-district  number  Two  and  settle  the  meaning  of 


SCHOOL  LAT  DECISIONS. 


Geo.  Waltz  v.  The  District  Township  of  New  Albany. 


the  expression  "original  district"  in  the  record  of  the  action  of  the 
board.  But  in  the  absence  of  other  than  parol  evidence  which  can- 
not be  admitted,  in  a  case  where  a  written  instrument  is  required 
by  the  immediate  authority  of  the  law,  we  are  obliged  to  infer  that 
the  intent  of  this  action  of  the  board  is  to  remove  the  school-house 
to  the  center  of  sub-district  number  Two.  The  school-house  is 
thus  placed  in  the  geographical  center  of  a  sub-district  consisting  of 
four  sections  of  land,  all  parts  of  which  are  equally  capable  of  be- 
ing settled;  and  although  the  majority  of  the  school-going  children 
at  present  reside  west  of  the  proposed  site,  it  is  clear  from  the 
testimony  that  the  few  residing  east  would  be  at  greater  inconveni- 
ence as  to  distance  at  least  in  getting  to  the  school-house  on  the  old 
site  than  the  many  will  be  in  getting  to  the  point  to  which  the 
school-house  is  ordered  to  be  removed.  The  obstructions  are  such 
as  can  easily  be  remedied  for  children  now  or  hereafter  residing  in 
any  part  of  the  district.  In  fixing  a  site  the  board  is  required  to 
consider  the  convenience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the  sub- 
district,  but  as  some  inconvenience  will  always  be  experienced,  it  is 
sufficient  that  no  part  of  the  territory  be  subject  to  greater  incon- 
venience than  its  corresponding  part  in  the  same  sub-district.  Hence 
the  necessity,  unless  prevented  by  controlling  circumstances,  of  fix- 
ing the  site  in  the  geographical  center  of  the  sub-district.  See  the 
case  ol  Seba  Norton  v.  the  District  Towns/lip  of  Oresco.  It  should 
be  remembered  that  acts  of  this  kind  are  of  a  discretionary  char- 
acter on  the  part  of  the  board  of  directors,  and  will  not  be  interfered 
with  unless  it  is  fully  apparent  that  such  action  transcended  the 
authority  of  the  law,  or  was  done  under  the  influence  of  passion  or 
prejudice  or  with  manifest  injustice  to  the  inhabitants  of  a  sub-dis- 
trict. The  testimony  which  is  full  in  this  case  does  not  in  my  judg- 
ment convict  the  board  of  an  abuse  of  discretion.  The  decision  of 
the  county  superintendent,  sustaining  the  action  of  the  board,  is 
therefore  AFFIRMED. 

A.  S.  KISSELL, 

Sujjerintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
July  10,1871. 


GEO.  WALTZ  v.  THE  DISTRICT   TOWNSHIP  OF   NEW  ALBANY. 
Appeal  from  Story  County. 

MOTION.     A  motion  to  dismiss  the  case  should  not  be  granted  on  the  ground 
that  the  affidavit  was  not  filed  with  the  county  superintendent  in  person ;  that  the 

s!6 


122  SCHOOL  L.VW  DECISIONS. 


Geo.  Waltz  v.  The  District  Township  of  New  Albany. 

affidavit  could  not  be  produced  at  trial,  or   that  the  notice  is  insufficient  or 
irregular. 

On  the  eighteenth  day  of  September,  A.  D.  1871,  the  board  of 
directors  of  the  district  township  of  New  Albany,  Story  county, 
refused  to  grant  the  petition  of  Geo.  Waltz  and  others,  praying  that 
the  territory  of  said  township  be  re  districted.  From  this  refusal 
Geo.  Waltz  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  on  the  day 
of  trial,  November  9th,  1871,  on  motion  of  defendant,  dismissed 
the  appeal  for  the  following  reasons,  to-wit: 

11 1st.  That  the  deputy  superintendent  acted  in  said  appeal  case 
instead  of  the  county  superintendent. 

2d.  That  there  was  no  affidavit  tiled  with  the  county  superin- 
tendent. 

3d.  By  the  testimony  of  one  J.  R.  Gage,  it  appears  that  an 
affidavit  was  filed  in  the  office  of  the  county  superintendent,  but 
Geo.  Waltz  could  not  supply  the  affidavit  on  oath." 

From  this  decision  Geo.  Waltz  appeals  to  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction. 

J.  S.  Frazier  for  appellant. 
Dana  <&  Balliet  for  appellee. 

From  the  testimony  it  appears, 

1st.  That  Waltz  filed  an  affidavit  of  appeal  in  the  office  of  the 
county  superintendent  with  J.  R.  Gage,  who  was  acting  as 
assistant  under  specific  directions  from  the  superintendent  in  his 
absence. 

2d.  That  said  Gage  marked  the  affidavit  filed,  and  issued  the 
usual  notice  to  the  secretary  of  the  district  board  of  said  township. 

3d.  At  the  trial  before  the  county  superintendent,  the  affidavit  of 
said  Waltz  was  called  for  but  could  not  be  found 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  affiant,  Geo.  Waltz,  failed  to  comply 
with  the  requirements  of  the  law  in  regard  to  appeals;  and  since 
the  affidavit  was  placed  in  the  hands  of  a  responsible  person  having 
charge  of  the  office  of  county  superintendent,  the  affiant  will  not 
lose  his  cause  through  absence  or  neglect  of  said  superintendent. 

The  appellee  having  made  an  appearance  before  the  county 
superintendent,  a  motion  to  dimiss  on  account  of  insufficiency  or 
irregularity  of  the  notice  should  not  be  granted.  The  note  on 
section  2840  of  the  Revision  of  1860  says:  "If  the  defendant  is 
there  by  reason  of  the  notice,  it  has  served  its  office."  "  If  that  has 
brought  him  to  court,  he  can  make  no  objection  to  it."  We  can 


SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS.  123 


Benjamin  Whicker  v.  The  District  Township  of  Chariton. 


Fcarcely  expect  a  county  superintendent  to  be  more  rigid  in  his 
ruling  than  courts  of  law. 

The  note  to  section  64  of  the  school  laws  of  Iowa  says:  "In 
case  of  temporary  absence  from  the  county,  or  of  s:ckness,  the 
superintendent  may  authorize  another  person  to  discharge  specific 
duties."  In  the  case  of  Smith  v.  The  District  Township  of  Ma- 
quoketa,  page  72,  School  Law  Decisions,  the  following  language  is 
used  :  "  The  object  of  this  system  of  appeals  is  to  promote  unifor- 
mity in  the  operations  of  school  laws  ai;d  the  attainment  of  sub- 
stantial justice,  and  this  object  should  not  be  defeated  by  technical 
objections." 

The  same  reasoning  applies  to  the  affidavit  which  could  not  be 
produced  at  the  time  of  the  trial.  Its  loss  did  not  prejudice  the 
interests  of  either  party;  it  had  already  performed  its  office,  and 
is  to  be  presumed  perfect  and  regular,  in  the  absence  of  proof  to  the 
contrary. 

The  brief  testimony  taken  on  the  points  above  named  indicates 
that  the  rights  of  the  affiant  were  not  duly  considered  in  the  action 
of  the  county  superintendent  dismissing  the  case;  and,  the  parties 
being  present,  the  examination  of  the  case  should  have  pro- 
ceeded upon  its  merits.  The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent 
is  therefore  reversed,  and  the  case  remanded  for  a  re-hearing. 

REVERSED. 

ALONZO  ABERNETHY, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
January  12,  1872. 


BENJAMIN  WHICKER  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  CHARITON. 
Appeal  from  Appanoose  County. 

SUB-DISTRICTS.  When  it  becomes  necessary  to  reduce  a  sub-district  in  extent, 
the  township  should  be  re-districted,  unless  sub-districts  can  be  formed  by 
division,  of  compact  shape,  and  sufficiently  large  to  sustain  good  schools. 

^On  the  18th  of  September,  1871,  the  board  of  directors  of  the 
district  township  of  Chariton,  Appanoose  count}7,  refused  to  grant 
the  petition  uf  Benjamin  Whicker  and  others,  asking  the  division  of 
sub-district  number  Four,  into  two  sub-districts. 

On  the  llth  of  October  said  Whicker  appealed  to  the  county 


SCHOOL  LiW  DECISIONS. 


Benjamin  Whicker  v.  The  District  Township  of  Chariton. 


superintendent,  who  after  hea-ing  the  testimony,  reversed  the  de- 
cision of  the  board,  and  created  a  new  sub-district  in  accordance 
with  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners. 

From  this  decision  Win.  McDaniel  and  Wm.  Fleener,  appealed 
November  27,  1871,  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

Harris  and  Vermilion,  for  appellant. 
]Sro  appearance  for  apj  el  lee. 

The  sub-district  in  question,  contains  six  and  three  fourths  sec- 
tions of  land,  and  is  in  the  form  of  an  L,  being  the  portion  of  a  tract 
three  miles  square,  less  a  piece  one  and  one-half  mi  es  square,  taken 
out  ot  the  south-west  corner.  The  petition  asked  that  a  new  sub- 
district  be  formed  by  cutting  from  the  south  east  corner,  a  tract  of 
land  two  miles  in  length  and  one  and  one-half  miles  in  width,  leav- 
ing the  o  d  sub-district  three  miles  long  and  from  one  to  one  ?nd 
one-half  miles  wide. 

The  sub-division  seems  to  have  been  asked  for,  principally  for 
two  reasons. 

1st.  That  there  were  enough  persons  between  the  ages  of  5  and 
21  years  in  the  territory  for  two  schools,  viz:  —  seventy-five. 

2nd.  That  a  few  of  them  were  required  to  travel  to  >  great  a  dis- 
tance to  enjoy  school  privileges.  It  is  doubtful  if  the  first  of  these 
positions  was  fully  sustained;  according  to  the  last  b'ennial  report 
from  this  office,  less  than  seventy-five  per  cent,  of  those  of  school 
age  attend  the  common  schools  at  all  in  the  state,  while  the  average 
attendance  is  but  forty-five  per  cent.  This  would  give  an  average 
of  thirty-four,  and  an  entire  probable  attendance  of  but  fifty-six  in 
this  sub-district. 

It  does  not  appear  from  the  transcript  that  the  school-house  is  not 
large  enough  to  accommodate  the  pupils  of  the  sub-district.  A  wide 
diversity  of  opinion  exists  as  to  what  should  be  the  area  of  sub-dis- 
tricts in  thinly  populated  townships;  but  it  is  conceded  that  tney 
should  not  contain  less  than  four  sections  of  land,  unless  for  good 
reasons.  Former  decisions  from  this  office  have  uniformly  discour- 
aged the  dividing  of  territory  into  small  sub-districts.  In  the  case 
of  Markley  v.  The  District  Township  of  Ludlow,  School  Law  De- 
cisions, this  language  is  used,  "As  a  general  rule,  it  is  better  to 
have  large  sub-districts  with  good  school-houses  well  furnished,  than 
to  have  small  sub-districts  and  poorly  furnished  school-houses.  This 
view  is  entertained,  not  only  by  the  prominent  educators  of  Iowa, 
but  by  those  of  other  states.  The  danger  is  that  we  may  continue 
to  divide  and  sub-divide,  until  the  sub-districts  become  so  numerous 
that  the  school  buildings  will  be  of  an  inferior  character,  aud  the 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  125 


Benjamin  Whicker  v.  The  District  Township  of  Chariton. 


schools  taught  in  them  practically  worthless.  The  common  school 
reform  in  other  states  has  been  characterized  by  the  consolidation 
rather  than  the  division  of  districts.  Iowa  should  avoid  the  neces- 
sity for  consolidation  by  keeping  the  sub-districts  of  a  good,  life- 
sustaining  size.  As  the  number  of  sub-districts  is  increased  beyond 
a  certain  limit,  the  size  of  the  schools  will  naturally  be  diminished; 
and  when  the  schools  are  small  there  is  a  very  common  feeling  that 
the  teachers  must  be  cheap,  hence  the  instruction  is  poor." 

While  the  evidence  from  the  transcript  does  not  clearly  prove  the 
necessity  for  another  school,  neither  does  it  show  a  dt  cided  wish  on 
the  part  of  the  inhabitant  for  a  division.  It  seems  that  there  were 
twenty  names  on  the  original  petition  asking  for  the  sub-division, 
and  that  seven  of  these  afterwards,  with  nineteen  others,  signed  a 
remonstrance  against  such  action.  The  county  superintendent 
seems  to  have  acted  in  good  faith,  and  to  have  done  what  he  thought 
was  best,  but  it  is  doubtful  if  he  had  such  authority.  His  first  and 
main  question  should  have  been,  "Have  the  board  of  directors 
abused  its  discretion,  or  acted  through  passion  or  prejudice?"  De- 
cisions have  been  given  so  often  from  this  office  that  the  discretion- 
ary power  of  boards  of  directors  "will  not  be  interfered  with  unless 
it  is  fully  apparent  that  such  power  has  been  abused,"  (see  Edwards 
v.  Dist.  Twp.^  West  Point,  p.  69,  School  Law  Decisit  ns,)  that  we 
will  not  now  enter  into  its  discussion. 

Much  as  we  desire  to  sustain  county  superintendents  in  appeals, 
it  cannot  be  done  if  they  exceed  their  authority,  or  reverse  the  action 
of  boards  of  directors  without  clear  and  cogent  reasons. 

Even  if  we  admit  that  it  would  be  better  to  divide  the  territory 
which  is  virtually  about  five  miles  long  and  one  mile  and  a  half 
wide  into  two  sub-districts  as  proposed,  there  would  still  be  a  ques- 
tion whether  this  arrangement  would  continue  long  to  give  satisfac- 
tion. A  sub-district  three  miles  long  by  one  to  one  and  one-half 
wide  is  not  of  convenient  shape.  But  this  is  not  the  only  alterna- 
tive. That  the  time  will  shortly  arrive  when  the  sub-district  under 
considerat;on  should  be  reduced  in  extent  is  doubtless  true;  but  in 
such  reduction  the  entire  township  will  probably  be  re-districted, 
making  each  sub-district  of  a  more  compact  form,  and  thus  furnish- 
ing better  educa'ional  facilities  for  all  pupils  residing  within  irs 
limits. 

In  our  opinion  the  evidence  does  not  sustain  the  county  superin- 
tendent in  the  formation  of  a  new  st^b-district  contrary  to  the  de- 
cision of  the  board  of  direc  ors,  and  his  decision  is  therefore 

REVERSED. 

ALONZO  ABERKETHY, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
March  4,  1872. 


126 


SCHOOL  LA.W  DECISIONS. 


Benjamin  Archer  v.  The  District  Township  of  Warren. 


BENJAMIN  ARCHER  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  WARREN. 
Appeal  from  Bremer  County. 

1.  SOB-DISTRICTS  :    Four  sections  of  land  is  considered  the  minimum  area  that 
a  sub-district  should  contain. 

2.  JURISDICTION  :    A  meeting  of  the  board  which  is  an  adjourned  one  from  the 
regular  uiee'irig  in  September,  may    change  sub-district  boundaries  if  the  prop- 
osition to  make  sush  change  was  presented  at  the  regular  meeting. 

On  the  2nd  clay  of  Octob'  r  A.  D  ,'  1871,  at  a  meeting  of  the  dis- 
trict township  board  of  Warren,  Bremer  counry,  held  pursuant  to  an 
adjournment'  from  the  regular  meeting  ia  September,  a  petition  by 
Benjamin  Archer  and  others,  was  presented,  asking  that  the  territory 
nov;  embraced  in  sub-districts  One,  Two,  and  Three,  be  formed  into 
four  equal  sub-districts  ;  which  petition  was  refused  by  the  board  of 
directors. 

On  the  25th  day  of  November  1871,  the  county  superintendent 
on  appeal  reversed  the  action  of  the  board  and  created  the  tub- 
districts  One,  Two,  Three,  and  Four,  in  accordance  with  the  prayer 
of  the  petitioners.  From  this  decision  the  district  township  of 
Warren  through  their  president  D.  A.  Bush,  take  an  appeal  to  the 
superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

Gray  &  Dougherty  for  appellant. 
H.  P.   Krown  for  app<-llee. 

It  appears  from  the  transcript  in  this  case,  that  the  west  one-third 
of  Warren  township,  being  a  tract  twelve  miles  long  and  two  wide, 
was  divided  by  the  board  of  directors  two  or  three  years  since  into 
three  sub-districts,  each  two  miles  square,  and  numbered  One,  Two, 
and  Three.  In  sub-districts  numbers  Two  and  Three,  the  geograph- 
ical centers  are  at  the  intersection  of  two  roads.  In  number  One, 
the  roads  intersect  at  a  point  eighty  rods  south  of  the  center. 

There  appear  to  be  no  considerable  natural  obstacles  in  the  terri- 
tory in  question,  and  school-houses  located  at  the  centers  of  the  sub- 
districts  can  all  be  reached  by  well  traveled  roads. 

The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is,  that  the  territory  be 
divided  into  four  sub-districts,  each  one  and  one-half  by  two  miles 
in  extent.  In  this  case  only  one  of  the  four  school-houses  if  located 
at  the  geographical  centers  of  sub-districts  would  be  on  a  cross  road. 

It  is  evident  that  as  we  diminish  the  area  of  the  district,  we  lessen 
the  average  distance  of  the  pupils  from  the  school-house  and  improve 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Benjamin  Archer  v.  The  District  Township  of  Warren. 


the  school  facilities  so  far  as  distance  alone  is  concerned.  This  will 
strictly  hold  true,  however,  onlj  as  the  form  of  the  district  remains 
a  square  and  roads  are  favorable  for  reaching  the  school-house. 

It  is  evident  that  school-houses  should,  when  practicable,  be 
located  at  or  near  the  center  of  sub-districts,  at  the  intersection  of 
roads;  and  that  the  most  desirable  form  of  a  sub-district  is  that  of  a 
square.  Where  roads  coincide  generally  with  section  lines,  these 
conditions  cannot  be  complied  with  if  sub-districts  contain  less  than 
four  sections  of  land. 

The  area  of  sub  districts  should  depend  somewhat  upon  the  density 
of  the  population  ;  in  thinly  populated  districts  they  should  be  of 
greater  extent  than  in  well  settled  localities.  The  desire  of  the 
patrons  to  be  located  conveniently  near  to  school-houses,  serves  to 
correct  any  tendency  to  embrace  too  great  an  extent  of  territory. 

"  The  danger  is  that  we  may  continue  to  divide  and  sub-divide  until 
the  sub-districts  become  so  numerous  that  the  school  buildings  will  be 
of  an  inferior  character,  and  the  schools  taught  in  them  practically 
worthless."  See  Markley  v.  District  Towns/tip  of  Ludlow,  /School 
Law  Decisions,  page  85  ;  hence  the  necessity  of  establishing  a  limit 
beymd  which  we  should  not  go  in  reducing  sub-districts  in  extent 
unless  for  peculiar  and  cogent  reasons.  What  that  limit  should  be 
is  a  matter  depending  upon  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  and  should 
be  determined  by  the  exercise  of  sound  judgment  and  discretion. 

When  pupils  become  too  numerous  to  be  instructed  by  one  teacher, 
and  to  be  accommodated  by  the  existing  school  buildings,  much  greater 
efficiency  will  be  secured  by  adding  thereto  or  erecting  more  com- 
modious buildings,  securing  the  assistance  of  an  additional  teacher, 
or  teachers,  as  circumstances  require,  and  grading  the  school,  than 
by  reducing  in  area  a  sub-district  which  now  contains  but  four  sec- 
tions of  land. 

A  consideration  which  should  have  weight  with  an  appellate  tri- 
bunal, is  as  follows:  "It  is  a  general  principle  of  law  that  the 
exercise  of  discretionary  power  will  not  be  interferred  with  unless 
it  is  fully  apparent  that  such  power  has  been  abused.  *  *  * 
In  changing  sub-district  boundaries  and  locating  school-houses,  the 
law  gives  the  board  of  directors  original  jurisdiction;  and  as  it  is 
discretionary  power  the  action  of  the  board  should  be  affirmed  on 
appeal,  unless  it  is  fully  apparent  from  the  evidence  that  the  board 
violated  law  or  abused  its  discretion.  If  there  is  a  reasonable  doubt, 
the  board  is  entitled  to  its  benefit.  The  action  of  the  board  may 
not  be  wholly  approved  by  the  county  superintendent,  but  if  it  be 
not  illegal  or  clearly  unjust,  it.  should  be  sustained"  See  Edwards 
v.  District  Township  of  West  Point,  School  Law  Decisions,  p.  69. 

Another  important  question  connected  with  this  case  is,  "Had 
the  board  authority  to  grant  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners  to  change 


228  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Hirarn  Dayton  v.  The  District  Township  of  Cedar. 


sub  district  boundaries  at  a  meeting  held  October  2,  which  was 
convened  pursuant  to  an  adjournment  of  the  regular  meeting  in 
September?"  If  it  had  not,  the  county  superintendent,  being  in  this 
case  an  appellate  tribunal,  had  no  greater  authority  in  the  matter 
than  the  board,  hence  could  not  change  sub-district  boundaries.  It  is 
conceded  that  the  board  could  perform  any  act  at  such  meeting  which 
could  have  been  done  at  the  previous  regular  meeting,  provided  the 
matter  was  presented  to  the  official  notice  of  the  board  at  the  origi- 
nal meeting. 

Section  24  of  the  school  law  provides  that  sub  district  boundaries 
shall  be  changed  at  the  "  regular  meeting  in  September,  or  at  any 
special  meeting  called  thereafter  for  that  pvrpose"  The  intent  of 
the  law,  as  we  understand  it,  being  that  if  changes  are  to  be  made 
at  any  other  time  than  at  the  regular  meeting  in  September,  the 
members  shall  have  notice,  and  due  time  for  considering  any  pro- 
posed changes. 

It  appears  from  the  evidence  in  this  case  that  no  such  presentation 
was  made  at  the  previous  meeting,  hence  we  believe  that  the  county 
superintendent  had  no  authority  to  change  sob-district  boundaries 
on  this  appeal. 

For  the  several  reasons  stated  we  cannot  sustain  the  action  of  the 
county  superintendent,  and  his  decision  is  therefore  REVERSED. 

ALONZO  ABER1STETHY, 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruc.wn. 

March  15,  1872. 


HIRAM  DAYTON,  Appellant,  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  CEDAR. 
Appeal  From    Washington  County. 

APPEAL:  An  appeal  will  not  lie  from  an  order  of  a  board  of  directors  mak- 
ing a  change  in  districit  township  boundaries,  when  the  concurrence  of  another 
board  is^necessary  to  complete  such  change. 

On  the  18th  day  of  September,  1871,  the  board  of  directors  ot 
the  district  township  of  Cedar,  Washington  county,  passed  a  resolu- 
tion to  attach  a  portion  of  sub-district  number  Three  to  sub-district 
number  Ten,  in  the  same  township. 

On  the  lith  day  of  October,  Hiram  Dayton  appealed  from  the 
action  of  the  board  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  on  the  12th 
day  of  December,  1871,  on  motion  of  appellee,  dismissed  the  case 
for  want  of  jurisdiction. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  129 


Hiram  Dayton  v.  The  District  Township  of  Cedar. 

From  this  decision  an  appeal  is  taken  to  the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction. 

J.  F.  Brown  for  appellant. 
McJunkins  and  Henderson  for  appellee. 

From  the  transcript  it  appears  that  the  sub-district  number  Three, 
concerning  which  the  appeal  is  taken,  is  one  of  those  school  dis- 
tricts formed  prior  to  March,  1858,  and  for  which  special  provision 
was  made  when  our  present  district  township  system  was  adopted. 
It  consists  of  about  three  sections  of  land  in  Cedar  township  and 
nearly  the  same  amount  in  Seventy-Six  township,  with  its  school- 
house  in  Cedar,  and  hence  all  under  the  control  of  the  district  town- 
ship of  Cedar  for  school  purposes. 

Section  89,  school  laws,  provides  that  "  the  boundaries  of  such 
sub-district  shall  not  be  changed,  except  with  the  concurrence  of 
the  boards  of  directors  of  the  townships  interested." 

The  board  resolved  that  the  west  half  of  sections  eighteen,  nine- 
teen, and  thirty,  lying  in  sub-district  number  Three,  be  attached  to 
sub-district  number  Ten  for  school  purposes. 

The  appellant  in  his  affidavit  alleges  among  other  errors  com- 
mitted by  the  board,  that  they  erred  in  attempting  to  attach  this 
tract  to  number  Ten,  for  the  reason  that  said  act  was  in  effect 
dividing  the  sub-district  without  the  concurrence  of  the  board  of 
directors  of  Seventy-Six  township,  and  therefore  illegal. 

The  attorneys  for  appellee  file  a  demurrer  to  the  affidavit  "  because 
the  said  affidavit  shows  that  the  concurrent  action  of  the  two  boards 
is  necessary  to  divide  said  sub-district,"  that  this  resolution  being 
only  the  initiative  act,  does  not  divide  the  district,  and  is  with- 
out force  till  concurred  in  by  the  other  board,  that  no  appeal  can  be 
had  from  an  incomplete  action,  and  that  the  appellant  had  as  yet 
suffered  no  grievance,  and  had  no  ground  of  appeal. 

The  county  superintendent  sustained  the  demurrer  and  dismissed 
the  case  for  want  of  jurisdiction. 

This  case  involves  an  interesting  question,  and  one,  we  believe, 
not  hitherto  determined  by  this  department,  viz:  In  those  changes 
of  boundaries  requiring  the  concurrent  action  of  two  boards,  from 
which  action,  if  aay,  will  an  appeal  lie? 

In  a  somewhat  analagous  case,  found  on  page  34,  School  Law 
Decisions,  a  petition  was  presented  to  a  board  of  directors  to  change 
the  boundaries  between  a  district  township  and  an  independent 
district,  the  petition  was  refused ;  an  appeal  was  taken  to  the  county 
superintendent  who  not  only  reversed  their  action,  but  decided  to  do 

si  7 


130  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Hiram  Dayton  v,  The  District  Township  of  Cedar. 

more  than  the  one  board  could  have  done,  and  ordered  the  changes 
to  be  made. 

This  decision,  we  think,  was  very  properly  reversed;  for  the  rea- 
son that  the  county  superintendent  could  not  do  on  appeal  what  was 
clearly  beyond  the  power  of  the  board,  from  which  the  appeal  was 
taken,  the  concurrence  of  another  board  being  necessary  to  complete 
the  action.  Another  question,  however,  wholly  distinct  from  this  is, 
has  a  county  superintendent  any  jurisdiction  in  such  a  case  ?  Can 
he  properly  affirm  or  reverse  the  decision  of  a  board  that  initiates  a 
movement  which  is  completed  or  not  at  the  option  of  another  board  ? 
After  careful  consideration  we  are  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  he 
cannot.  That  an  appeal  will  not  He  from  an  order  of  a  board  of 
directors  making  a  change  in  district  township  boundaries,  where  the 
concurrence  of  another  board  is  necessary  to  make  the  change.  Other- 
wise a  county  superintendent  may  have  to  entertain  and  decide  upon 
two  appeals  in  one  and  the  same  case.  This,  in  our  opinion,  would 
lead  to  confusion  and  unnecessary  litigation.  The  law  provides 
that,  "  any  person  aggrieved  by  any  decision  or  order  of  the  district 
board  of  directors,  in  matter  of  law,  or  fact,  may  appeal  therefrom 
to  the  county  superintendent."  But  if  the  order  or  decision  is  sim- 
ply the  initiative  movement,  though  the  action  is  not  void,  it  remains 
inoperative,  and  without  force,  until  concurred  in,  and  does  not  of 
itself  constitute  a  cause  of  grievance.  In  our  opinion  equal  and  full 
justice  will  be  secured  in  all  such  cases  if  the  appeal  is  taken  only 
from  the  action  of  the  board  concurring  or  refusing  to  concur  with 
the  former  action  of  another  board  interested.  From  this  we  believe 
an  appeal  should  lie. . 

In  the  case  before  us,  if  the  board  of  directors,  as  alleged  in  the 
affidavit,  seek  to  do  an  illegal  act,,  or  refuse  to  perform  any  duty 
imposed  by  law,  they  can  be  restrained  by  injunction,  or  compelled 
to  do  their  duty  by  a  resort  to  the  civil  courts. 

It  is  therefore  held  that  the  county  superintendent  properly  dis- 
missed the  case  for  want  of  jurisdiction,  and  his  decision  is  there- 
fore 

AFFIRMED. 

ALONZO  ABEKNETHY, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 

March  i  2,  1872. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  13  [ 

Nels  Jacobson  v.  The  District  Township  of  Lafayette. 

NELS   JACOBSON  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  LAFAYETTE. 
Appeal  From   Story  County. 

SUB-DISTRICT. — Erection  of  from  adjoining  district  townships  :—  The  county 
superintendent  will  be  sustained  on  appeal  in  erecting  territory  into  a  sub-dis- 
trict in  an  adjoining  district  township,  under  the  provisions  of  section  25,  school 
laws,  if  such  territory  is  attached  to  the  adjoining  district  township  by  reason  of 
natural  obstacles. 

From  the  record  in  this  case  it  appears  that  there  is  about  a  sec- 
tion of  land  lying  in  the  southwest  corner  of  Howard  township, 
Story  county,  containing  from  twenty -five  to  thirty  persons  of  school 
age,  cut  off  from  the  rest  of  the  township  by  Skunk  river. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  Howard  township,  held 
on  the  24rth  day  of  September,  A.  D.  1870,  it  was  resolved  "  that 
this  territory  embracing  the  southwest  one-fourth  and  the  west  one- 
half  of  the  northwest  one-fourth  of  section  thirty;  also  the  southwest 
one-fourth  of  the  north-east  one-fourth,  the  west  one-half  of  the 
southeast  one-fourth,  and  the  west  one-half  of  section  thirty-one, 
Howard  township,  be  attached  to  Lafayette  township  for  school  pur- 
poses." 

At  a  meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  of  Lafayette  township, 
held  October  15,  1870,  it  was  resolved  "  that  the  land  attached  to 
Lafayette  from  Howard  township  be  supplied  with  a  school  for  a  term 
of  three  months  this  year.  "  Nels  Jacobson,  the  appellant,  being 
appointed  sub-director.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  territory  was 
erected  into  a  sub-district  until  the  case  was  appealed  to  the  county 
superintendent 

September  18th,  the  petition  of  Nels  Jacobson  and  others  was 
presented  to  the  board  of  Lafayet  e  township,  asking  that  the  said 
territory  be  erected  into  a  sub-district,  which  petition  was  refused  by 
the  board  on  the  ground  that  the  territory  was  not  legally  attached 
to  Lafayette  township  for  school  purposes.  From  this  refusal  Nels 
Jacobson  appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who,  on  the  6th 
day  of  January,  1872,  reversed  the  action  of  the  board,  and  erected 
the  territory  with  other  of  Lafayette  township,  into  a  sub-district. 

From  this  decision  the  district  township,  through  their  president, 
appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

W.  A.  Wier,  for  appellant. 
J.  S.  Frazier,  for  appellee. 

In   this   case,  the  county  superintendent  has  done  on  appeal  only 


J32  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Rnfus  Cheney  v.  The  District  Township  of  Pleasant  Valley. 

what  he  had  a  right  to  do  originally.  The  board  of  Howard  town- 
ship having  passed  a  resolution,  taking  the  initiative  step  in  such 
transfer  of  territory,  the  county  superintendent,  if  he  believed  that 
"  natural  obstacles"  required  such  action,  should  have  erected  the 
territory  into  a  sub-district,  and  transmitted  his  order  to  the  secretary 
of  each  district,  and  the  transfer  would  have  been  complete. 

As  to  the  advisability  of  attaching  this  strip  of  land,  which  is 
about  one-half  a  mile  wide,  by  two  in  length,  there  can  be  but  little 
doubt.  It  need  not  finally  increase  the  number  of  sub-districts  in 
Lafayette  township.  It  might  be  well  to  increase  the  size  of  this 
sub-district  by  the  addition  of  territory  on  the  west,  unless  the 
existence  of  unbridged  streams  makes  such  action  impracticable. 
The  board  of  directors  are  at  liberty  to  make  such  changes  in  the 
boundaries  established  by  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent 
in  this  case  as  the  interests  of  the  schools  of  their  township  require, 
if  in  so  doing  they  provide  school  facilities  for  the  residents  of  the 
territory  in  question. 

We  are  fully  satisfied  from  an  examination  of  the  evidence,  and 
the  plats  and  maps  of  that  and  the  surrounding  territory,  that  the 
action  of  the  county  superintendent  shuuld  be  sustained;  his  decis- 
ion is  therefore  AFFIRMED. 

ALONZO  ABEKKETHY, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
April  15,  1872. 


RDFUS  CHENEY  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  PLEASANT  YALLEY. 

Appeal  from  Scott  County. 

SCHOOL  HOUSE  SITE.  The  power  to  fix,  carries  with  it  the  power  to  change 
the  site  of  a  school-house  by  the  district  board. 

On  the  20th  day  of  March,  A.  D.  1871,  Philip  Earhart  and  others 
petitioned  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  township  of  Pleasant 
Valley,  Scott  county,  to  change  the  location  of  the  school-house  in 
sub-district  number  Two,  of  said  township.  The  petition  was 
ordered  to  be  placed  on  file. 

May  1st,  1871,  a  remonstrance  was  received  and  placed  on  file. 
The  consideration  of  the  petition  was  deferred  from  time  to  time 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  133 


Kufus  Cheney  v.  The  District  Township  of  Pleasant  Valley. 

until  the  16th  of  December,  1871,  and  then  rejected.  Eufus  Che- 
ney appealed  to  the  county  superintendent,  who  on  the  26th  of  Jan- 
uary, 1872,  reversed  the  action  of  the  board  and  established  a  site 
in  accordance  with  the  prayer  of  said  petition,  from  which  decision 
Geo.  J.  Hyde  appeals  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

Foster  &  Gabber  t  and  Cook  <&  Browning  for  appellant. 
James  T.  Lane  for  appellee. 

The  above  case  presents  strong  points  on  either  side.  The  appel- 
lants ask  that  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  be  reversed 
for  the  following  among  other  reasons: 

1.  That  he  exceeded  his  authority  in  locating  the  school-house 
site.     That  the  board  had  no  authority  to  remove  the  school-house 
until  funds  had  been  voted  for  that  purpose  by  the  electors ;  neither 
had  the  county  superintendent.     That  they  could  not  procure  a  new 
site  until  the  old  one  was  disposed  of. 

2.  That  the  old  site  is  at  the  intersection  of  two  good  and  well 
traveled  roads;   that  the  new  one  selected  is  on  a  narrow,  unfre- 
quented road. 

3.  That  the  sub-district  is  already  in  debt  for  the  repairs  recently 
made  on  their   school-house,  and  should  not  incur  an  additional 
indebtedness  now  for  its  removal. 

4.  That  appellees  should  have  made  their  application  for  the 
re-location  before  the  house  was  repaired;    that  having  neglected 
that  favorable  opportunity  they  are  now  estopped. 

5.  That  a  majority   of  the   residents   of   the   sub-district  are 
opposed  to  the  removal. 

There  seems  to  have  been  a  question  formerly  whether  the 
authority  under  the  school  law  to  remove  school-houses  from  one 
location  to  another  belonged  to  the  electors  or  to  the  board  of  direc- 
tors. ^ 

At  the  December  term  of  the  supreme  court,  1867,  it  was  decided 
that  "the  power  to  fix,  carries  with  it  the  power  to  change  the  site 
of  a  school-house  by  the  district  board,"  and  for  some  time  previous 
to  this  decision  the  same  view  was  held  by  this  department.  The 
board  clearly  have  jurisdiction  in  fixing  and  changing  sites,  and 
removing  school-houses,  and  their  action  in  this  matter  is  not 
dependent  on  any  previous  action  of  the  electors. 

It  appears  from  the  evidence  that  the  new  site  is  on  a  public  road, 
on  high,  rolling  ground,  and  accessible  from  all  parts  of  the  sub- 
district,  and  that  the  site  originally  selected  for  the  sub-d;  strict  in 
question  approximated  closely  to  the  one  established  by  the  county 


]  34  SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


Rufue  Cheney  v.  The  District  Township  of  Pleasant  Valley. 


superintendent,  and  that  subsequently  territory  from  an  adjoining 
township  was  annexed  to  the  sub-district,  the  site  being  moved 
three-fourths  of  a  mile  to  the  north  and  east  to  accommodate  the 
residents  of  the  territory  thus  annexed.  The  said  territory  was 
afterwards  detached  and  the  original  boundaries  of  the  sub-district 
restored;  since  which  action  the  inhabitants  of  the  southern  and 
western  portions  have  felt  and  expressed  a  desire  for  the  removal  of 
the  school-house  to  a  more  central  location.  The  feeling  that  it 
should  and  would  ultimately  be  removed  has  been  so  strongly  and 
generally  expressed  throughout  the  district  that  for  years  the  neces- 
sary repairs  were  neglected. 

It  further  appears  that  a  large  indebtedness  to  adjoining  town- 
ships has  been  incurred  by  the  district  township  of  Pleasant  Valley 
fur  the  tuition  of  those  pupils  residing  in  the  southern  and  Western 
portions  of  the  sub-district. 

If  Pleasant  Valley  is  incurring  a  large  annual  expense  for  the 
instruction  of  portions  of  its  population  in  adjoining  townships,  and 
its  own  school  is  thereby  reduced  very  considerably  in  numbers,  in 
efficiency,  and  in  interest  as  certified  by  the  county  superintendent, 
and  if,  as  he  says,  by  the  removal  of  the  school-house  to  the  new 
site  "this  expense  would  be  avoided,  the  school  would  be  much 
larger  and  more  efficient,  and  the  expense  of  maintaining  it  no 
greater  than  at  present,"  it  might  be  only  true  economy  to  incur  even 
the  maximum  expenditure  named  to  remove  the  house  to  the  new 
site.  The  expense  of  moving  school-houses  is  usually  defrayed 
from  the  contingent  fund,  and  in  this  case  there  need  be  no  indebt- 
edness and  but  a  very  small  tax  for  that  purpose. 

The  important  question,  however,  it  seems  to  us  is,  does  equity 
require  that  the  school-house  be  at  the  old  or  new  site  ? — do  the  per- 
manent and  best  interests  of  the  sub-district  require  if s  removal  ?  — 
will  the  convenience  of  each  portion  of  the  whole  sub-district  be  best 
subserved  thereby  ?  If  so,  the  decision  of  the  county  superintend- 
ent was  right. 

It  appears  to  us  from  all  the  facts  presented  that  the  board  erred 
in  rejecting  the  petition,  and  that  the  action  of  the  county  superin- 
tendent reversing  their  decision  should  be  sustained.  His  decision 
is  therefore 

AFFIRMED. 

ALONZO  ABEEKETIIY, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction. 
May  13,  1872. 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  135 

W.  W.  Harvey  v.  The  District  Township  of  Stapleton. 

W.  W.  HARVEY  v.  THE  DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP  OF  STAPLETON. 
Appeal  from   ChicJcasaw  County. 

1.  AFFIDAVIT  :  May  be  amended  in  the  discretion  of  the  county  superinten- 
dent. 

1.  SUB -DISTRICT  ;  When  a  sub-district  composed  of  four  sections  of  land  has 
built  its  own  school-house,  it  should  not  be  consolidated  with  another  as  a  tem- 
porary expedient  to  avoid  the  expense  of  maintaining  a  school. 

3. ;    The  formation  of  small  or  irregularly  shaped  sub-districts  should 

be  avoided. 

Upon  the  petition  of  William  Fox  and  others,  the  board  of  direc- 
tors of  the  district  township  of  Stapleton,  Ohickasaw  county,  on  the 
6th  day  of  February,  A.  D.  1872,  changed  the  boundaries  of  sub-dis- 
tricts, whereby  numbers  Six  and  Seven  were  consolidated. 

Appeal  was  taken  from  this  action  by  W.  W.  Harvey,  to  the 
county  superintendent,  who  on  the  25th  day  of  March,  1872,  reversed 
their  action.  The  board,  through  their  president,  Michael  Burns, 
appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. 

Powers  &  Kenyon,  for  appellant. 
No  appearance  for  appellee. 

The  irregularity  of  the  notice  to  the  members  of  the  board  will 
not  invalidate  their  action.  It  is  held  that  the  superintendent  did 
not  err  in  permitting  the  affidavit  to  be  amended.  See  Smith  v. 
The  District  Township  of  Maquoketa. 

The  evidence  adduced  at  the  trial  before  the  county  superinten- 
dent aids  us  but  little  in  determining  whether  the  action  of  the  board 
or  that  of  the  county  superintendent  will  best  promote  the  interests 
of  the  district. 

The  board  seem  to  have  decided  that  the  school  in  sub -district 
number  Six  might  for  the  present  be  discontinued  and  proceeded  to 
incorporate  that  district  with  number  Seven,  but  it  appears  to  have 
been  only  a  temporary  expedient,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  the 
expense  of  an  additional  school.  If  one  school  would  suffice  for  the 
two  sub-districts,  the  board  might,  doubtless,  have  obtained  the  consent 
of  the  county  superintendent  to  discontinue  the  school  in  number 
Six,  and  permit  those  of  its  pupils  who  reside  farthest  from  the 
school-house  in  number  Seven,  to  attend  school  in  the  adjoining  sub- 
districts.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  townships  are  often 


SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS. 


W.  W.  Harvey  v.  The  District  Township  of  Stapleton. 


divided  into  small  sub-districts  before  euch  action  is  demanded  by 
the  best  interests  of  the  residents.  The  efficiency  of  the  schools 
would  be  increased  and  the  expense  diminished  if  boards  of  direc- 
tors in  new  and  thinly  populated  townships  would  avoid  the  forma- 
tion of  small  sub-districts. 

But  when  a  sub-district  has  been  formed  containing  four  sections, 
and  a  good  school-house  has  been  built  in  the  center  (especially  if 
built  as  in  this  case  by  the  sub-district  itself)  boards  should  act  with 
extreme  deliberation,  in  making  such  changes  as  will  require  the 
removal  of  school-houses. 

The  district  formed  by  the  board  February  6th,  1872,  consists  of 
seven  and  one-half  sections  of  land,  and  contains  according  to  the 
plat,  sixteen  families. 

The  area  is  not  considered  too  great  when  so  thinly  populated,, 
but  the  length  of  the  sub-district  as  compared  with  its  width  and  its 
irregular  outline  are  very  objectionable  features,  not  only  causing 
inconvenience  to  the  residents  of  this  sub-district,  but  also  prevent- 
ing the  formation  of  sub-districts  of  compact  form  from  territory 
immediately  adjoining. 

The  board  of  directors  may  at  their  next  regular  meeting  in  Sep- 
tember, re-district  the  township,  or  so  much  of  it  as  may  be  neces- 
sary, making  the  sub-districts  as  compact  and  regular  in  shape  as 
practicable,  otherwise  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  is 

AFFIRMED. 

ALONZO  ABERNETHY, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction  . 
July  25,  18T2. 


INDEX    TO    APPEAL    CASES. 


AFFIDAVIT—  PAGE. 

The  affidavit  may  be  amended  when  such  action  is  not  prejudicial  to  the 
rights  of  any  party  interested 72 

An  affidavit  is  a  statement  in  writing,  signed  and  made  upon  oath  before 
an  authorized  magistrate 76 

May  be  amended  in  the  discretion  of  the  county  superintendent 135 

APPEAL— 

An  appeal  may  be  taken  at  any  time  within  thirty  days  from  the  rendi- 
tion of  the  order  complained  of 7 

May  be  taken  from  an  order  of  the  board  which  is  in  effect  the  affirm- 
ance of  a  former  action 16 

Waiver  of  right  of.  Where  an  agreement  between  the  parties  stipulates 
that  the  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  shall  be  final,  the  case 
will  not  be  heard  by  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  on  ap- 
peal   30 

An  appeal  will  not  lie  from  an  order  of  a  board  of  directors  making  a 
change  in  the  boundaries  of  the  district  township,  where  the  concur- 
rence of  the  board  of  an  adjoining  district  township  is  necessary  to 
effect  the  change. 34,  128 

All  unwise  or  inexpedient  action  of  the  board,  whether  of  law  or  of  fact, 
when  within  their  powers,  must  find  its  correction  by  an  appeal  to 
the  county  superintendent 78 

BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS— 

The  acts  of  a  board  are  presumed  to  be  regular,  legal  and  just,  and 
should  be  affirmed  by  the  county  superintendent,  upon  appeal,  unless 
proof  is  brought  to  show  the  contrary 4,  5 

The  board  should  be  sustained  upon  appeal,  unless  they  have  violated 
law,  abused  their  discretionary  power,  or  have  acted  with  manifest 
injustice 4,  118 

Power  of  to  erect  school-house.  The  board  cannot  contract  for  school-house 
without  authority  from  the  electors 29 

CONDITIONAL  JUDGMENT— 

May  be  rendered  if  the  interests  ot  the  district  require 68,    74 

CONTESTED  ELECTION— 

Sub-director.  The  right  to  hold  and  exercise  the  office  of  sub-director,  in 
case  of  contest,  must  be  determined  by  the  district  court,  under  an 

information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto  53,  105 

Sl8  137 


138 


INDEX 


CONTESTED  ELECTION— CONTINUED— 

Jurisdiction.  The  proper  method  of  determining  a  contested  election  for 
school  director  is  by  an  action  in  the  nature  of  quo  warranto,  brought 

in  the  district  court 97 

CONTRACT- 

Approval  of  by  president.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  president  to  approve  the 
contract  made  by  the  sub-director  with  a  teacher,  if  made  in  accord- 
ance with  the  rules  and  regulations  established  by  the  board 117 

COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT— 

Jurisdiction  of.  The  county  superintendent  is  not  limited  to  a  reversal  or 
affirmance  of  the  action  of  the  board,  but  he  determines  the  matter 

brought  upon  appeal,  which  was  determined  by  the  board 43 

May  upon  appeal  create  sub-district 72 

Has  no  jurisdiction  of  an  appeal  until  an  affidavit  is  filed 76 

Should  not  reverse  an  action  of  the  board  of  directors  which  is  in  accord- 
ance with  instructions  of  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. ..    81 
At  the  hearing  of  an  appeal  before  the  county  seperintendent,  it  is  com- 
petent for  him,  upon  his  own  motion,  to  call  additional  witnesses  to  give 
testimony 93 

DEFAULT— 

The  decision  of  the  county  superintendent  when  rendered  by  default, 
will  be  affirmed  unless  the  parties  have  failed  to  receive  proper  no- 
tice, or  other  good  reasons  are  shown  to  exist,  for  failure  to  appear.     68 
DISTRICT  TOWNSHIP— 

Should  not  ordinarily  contain  more  than  nine  sub-districts . .     81 

ELECTION— 

Evidence  of.  The  certificate  of  the  officers  of  the  annual  sub-district 
meeting  is  the  legal  evidence  of  election  as  sub-director,  and  as  a 
general  rule  a  board  of  directors  is  justified  in  declining  to  recog- 
nize a  person  as  a  member  of  the  board  until  he  produces  such  cer- 
tificate    97 

EVIDENCE— 

Parol.  Can  not  be  received  in  the  absence  of  allegations  of  fraud,  to  con- 
tradict or  impeach  the  validity  of  school-district  records 93 

Oral,    Not  admissible  when  written  is  obtainable „ 120 

FUND— 

Teachers'.  Electors  at  the  district  township  meeting  cannot  legally  vote 
to  make  each  sub-district  independent  in  reference  to  teachers' 
fund 05 

Contingent.  The  use  of  the  contingent  fund  for  the  purpose  of  building 
a  school-house  is  unauthorized  by  law  and  is  clearly  illegal 99 


TO    SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  139 

INDEPENDENT  DISTRICT— 

Cannot  be  formed  from  a  portion  of  an  incorporated  town  which  con- 
tains less  than  three  hundred  inhabitants 107 

JURISDICTION— 

The  affidavit  must  show  that  the  affiant  is  a  citizen  injuriously  affected 
by  the  action  of  the  board,  giving  sufficient  data  to  establish  his 
claim  to  a  hearing 25 

The  decisions  ot  the  county  superintendent  are  reviewed  upon  evidence 
submitted  at  the  time  of  the  trial  before  the  county  superintendent.  39 

An  adjourned  meeting  of  the  board  may  do  what  a  previous  one  might 
have  done 45 

The  county  superintendent  can  do  upon  appeal  only  what  the  board, 

originally  had  power  to  do 62 

Afr.er  the  expiration  of  thirty  days  the  county  superintendent  can  ac- 
quire no  jurisdiction  in  appeal  cases 78 

In  taking  an  appeal  from  the  decision  of  a  county  superintendent,  the 
affidavit  must  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction before  the  expiration  of  thirty  days  from  the  rendition  of 
the  decision  complained  of 89 

In  an  appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  the  filing  of  the 
affidavit  by  appellant  with  the  county  superintendent,  even  if  done 
within  the  time  required,  is  not  such  a  compliance  with  the  law  as 
will  give  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  jurisdiction  of  the 
case 89 

An  application  for  an  appeal  filed  within  thirty  days  from  the  act  of  the 
board  complained  of  will  not  give  the  county  superintendent  juris- 
diction of  the  case.  The  appeal  must  be  taken  by  affidavit 102 

The  county  superintendent  has  not  jurisdiction  of  cases  involving  a 

money  demand 110 

A  meeting  of  the  board  which  is  an  adjourned  one  from  the  regular 
meeting  in  September,  may  change  sub-district  boundaries  if  the 
proposition  to  make  such  change  was  presented  at  the  regular 
meeting 126 

LIABILITY  OF  DISTRICT  BOARD— 

Where  a  board  of  directors  refuses  to  draw  an  order  on  the  treasurer 
for  the  amount  of  a  judgment  obtained  against  the  district,  and  there- 
fore a  judgment  is  obtained  against  the  individuals  composing  the 
board,  the  claim  against  the  district  has  expired,  and  the  board  has 

then  no  power  to  draw  such  order 8 

A  board  of  directors  has  no  power  to  levy  a  tax  for  the  benefit  of  school 

house  fund,  unless  authorized  so  to  do  by  a  vote  of  the  electors 8 

MOTION— 

When  a  motion  to  dismiss  is  overruled,  the  superintendent  should  pro- 
ceed to  try  the  case  upon  its  merits 7 


140  INDEX 

MOTION— CONTINUED— 

A  motion  to  dismiss  the  case  should  not  be  granted  on  the  ground  that 
the  affidavit  was  not  filed  with  the  county  superintendent  in  per- 
son ;  that  the  affidavit  could  not  be  produced  at  trial,  or  that  the 
notice  is  insufficient  or  irregular 121 

NOTICE- 

All  parties  interested  and  immediately  connected  with  a  case  should  be 

notified  by  the  county  superintendent  of  the  time  and  place  of  trial.     40 
The  county  superintendent  should  not  issue  notice  of  final  hearing  until 

both  the  affidavit  and  transcript  of  the  district  secretary  have  been 

filed  in  his  office , 76 

The  want  of  notice  is  waived  by  the  voluntary  appearance  of  the  party 

for  any  purpose  connected  with  the  cause 103 

ORDERS— 

When  improperly  issued  by  the  board  of  directors,  the  proper  remedy 
is  an  injunction  from  the  civil  courts 110 

PROCEEDINGS- 

Regularity  of  presumed.  When  the  district  township  records  show  that 
for  a  number  of  consecutive  years,  the  children  of  certain  congres- 
sional divisions  of  land,  have  been  enumerated,  and  have  attended 
school  in  a  certain  district  township  and  no  objections  have  been 
raised,  it  will  be  presumed  that  the  territory  is  regularly  attached  to, 
and  forms  a  part  of,  said  district  township 12 

In  the  absence  of  proof  to  the  contrary,  the  legal  presumption  is  that  the 
proceedings  of  the  county  superintendent  were  entirely  regular. . .  63 

RECORD— 

Defective.     May  be  amended 27 

Irregularity  or  defect  in.  An  irregularity  or  defect  in  the  records  of  the 
board,  which  does  not  injuriously  affect  the  interests  of  any,  and  is 
not  of  itself  a  violation  of  law,  will  not  render  invalid  their  official 

actions  in  relation  thereto 37 

The  board  of  directors  may  at  any  time  amend  the  record  of  the  district, 
when  necessary  to  correct  mistakes  or  supply  omissions.    And  may, 
upon  proper  showing,  be  compelled,  by  mandamus,  to  make  such 
corrections 93 

RESIDENCE- 
IS  not  acquired  by  temporary  removal  to  a  place  for  the  purpose  of 

attending  school 109 

REVOCATION  OF  TEACHER'S  CERTIFICATE— 

Manner  of  appeal  from  action  of  county  superintendent 56 

The  order  of  a  county  superintendent  revoking  certificate  will  not  be  in- 
ferred with  on  appeal  to  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction, 
unless  it  appears  that  he  acted  from  passion  or  prejudice 56 


TO   SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  141 

SCHOOL  HOUSE— 

Power  of  the  board  to  build.  If  in  their  judgment  the  wants  of  a  sub-dis- 
trict require,  the  board  are  empowered  to  erect  a  school-house  with- 
out action  on  the  part  of  the  electors  of  the  sub-district 31 

Removal  of.  A  vote  of  the  electors  to  remove  a  school-house,  will  not 
compel  the  board  to  act  affirmatively  in  relation  thereto 102 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  SITE— 

Location  of  The  county, superintendent,  on  appeal,  may  fix  the  site 
of  school-house 33 

In  the  location  of  a  school-house  site,  personal  examination  should  be 
made  of  the  different  localities,  by  the  county  superintendent 40 

Location  of.  In  fixing  the  school -house  site,  the  geographical  position, 
and  the  convenience  of  the  people  of  each  portion  of  the  sub-dis- 
trict should  be  considered 47,  49,  66,  83 

Location  of  by  board.  The  board  should  be  sustained  in  the  loca- 
tion of  a  school-house  site,  when  upon  examination  the  site  is  found 
to  be  established  in  accordance  with  law  and  equity 59,  120 

While  the  probabilities  of  the  future  should  not  be  ignored,  the  necessi 

ties  of  the  present  must  be  observed  in  locating  school-house  sites  60 

Should  be  on  a  public  road,  and  so  located  as  to  be  convenient  and  ac- 
cessible   106 

It  Is  important  that  the  school-house  site  be  located  on  a  public  road,  and 
as  nearly  as  practicable  at  the  geographical  center  of  the  district.  .115,  120 

The  power  to  fix,  carries  with  it  the  power  to  change  the  site  of  a 
school-house  by  the  district  board 132 

SCHOOr -HOUSE  TAX- 

In  levying  tax  for  school-house  purposes  the  board  may  make  such  ap- 
portionment as  justice  may  require,  provided  the  rate  does  not  ex- 
ceed ten  mills  on  the  dollar 1 

When  the  electors  of  a  sub-district  have  determined  and  certified  a 
sum  of  money  to  the  district  township  meeting  for  the  purpose  of 
erecting  a  school-house,  the  maximum  rate  should  be  levied  from 
year  to  year  until  the  whole  amount  is  raised 28 

Where  it  has  been  the  uniform  custom  to  apportion  the  school-house 
tax  among  the  several  sub-districts,  the  board  are  not  governed  by  a 
vote  of  the  electors  instructing  them  to  levy  the  tax  directly  upon 
the  property  of  a  sub-district 36 

Certification  of  to  district  township  meeting.  The  presentation  of  the 
sub-district  records,  in  which  is  embodied  the  certificate  of  the  sum 
determined ;  and  the  notification  of  the  secretary  and  president  there- 
of, is  one  which  meets  every  legal  requirement ...  50 

When  voted  by  the  electors  of  a  ksub-district  and  duly  certified  to  the 
district  township  meeting  and  to  the  board  of  directors,  must  be 
levied  by  the  board ;  and  can  only  be  devoted  to  the  specific  purpose 
for  which  it  has  been  voted. .  99 


142  INDEX 

SCHOOL-HOUSE  TAX— CONTINUED— 

The  district  township  meeting  may,  in  the  absence  of  any  action  by  the 
electors  of  a  sub-district ;  vote  a  tax  to  build  a  school  house  in  su<  h 
sub-district 9(J 

When  by  successive  apportionments,  the  rate  of  school-house  tax 
througout  the  sub-districts  of  the  township  has  been  rendered  uni- 
form, a  uniform  rate  should  be  maintained Ill 

If  the  district  township  meeting  neglects  or  refuses  to  vote  the  sum 
certified  as  determined  by  the  electors  of  a  sub-district  for  school- 
house  purposes,  or  a  sum  adequate,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  board  to 
apportion  such  sum  among  the  several  sub-district  as  justice  re- 
quires   113 

SETTLEMENT— 

After  an  independent  district  has  been  erected  within  :i  township  dis- 
trict, and  the  respective  boards  of  directors  have  paid  the  debts 
owing  by  the  district  prior  to  the  separation,  and  divided  the  funds 
on  hand,  a  new  board  of  one  of  these  organizations  cannot  appeal  .       6 
SUB-DIRECTOR— 

Continues  in  office  until  his  successor  is  elected  and  qualified.  Section 
2097,  Revision  1860  1 

Failure  to  qualify  anew  does  not  create  a  vacancy 1 

Is  not  entitled  to  compensation  for  official  services 1 

In  contracting  with  a  teacher,  must  be  governed  by  instructions  of  the 
board  of  directors 15 

Not  to  be  appointed  in  new  districts.  When  new  sub-districts  are  estab- 
lished the  appointment  of  sub-directors  in  the  sub-districts  so  created 
is  illegal ;  as  such  change  does  not  take  effect  until  the  next  sub-dis- 
trict election  thereafter 48 

It  is  the  duty  ot  the  sub-director,  to  negotiate  and  make  in  his  sub-dis- 
trict, contracts  for  employing  teachers,  under  such  rules  and  regula- 
tions as  the  board  may  prescribe  not  inconsistent  with  law 117 

SUB -DISTRICT- 
IS  not  entitled  to  draw  money  from,  district  treasury  in  lieu  of  the  full 

term  of  school  required  by  law. 1 

Can  be  formed  of  parts  of  different  townships  only  by  reason  of  natural 

obstacles 42 

Change  of  boundaries.  The  boundaries  of  sub-districts  shall  be  changed, 
or  new  districts  formed,  only  between  the  regular  meeting  of  the 
board  in  September,  and  the  sub-district  election  held  in  the  March, 

following 62 

Formation  of.    While  the  law  contemplates  that  all  the  youth  of  the  state, 
shall  enjoy  facilities  for  education  as  nearly  equal  as  practicable,  yet    * 
in  the  formation  of  sub-districts,  care  should  be  taken  that  that  they 
are  not  made  so  small  geographically,  and  weak  financially,  as  to  be 
unable  to  maintain  good  schools 67 


TO    SCHOOL  LAW  DECISIONS.  143 

SUB-DISTRICT— CONTINUED— 

Formation  from  two  townships.  Sub  districts  can  be  formed  from  parts 
of  two  or  more  district  townships,  only  when  they  are  rendered  nec- 
essary "by  reason  of  streams  or  other  natural  obstacles." 92 

The  practice  of  cutting  district  townships  into  numerous  sub-districts  of 
small  size,  is  detrimental  to  the  educational  progress  of  the  state,  and 
will  not  be  sustained  upon  appeal 103 

Composed  of  parts  of  two  townships.  Upon  the  written  application  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  electors  residing  upon  the  territory  within  the  township 
in  which  the  school-house  is  not  situated,  boards  of  directors  must 
divide  the  sub-district 108, 112 

Should  be,  if  possible,  compact  and  regular  in  form ;  and  ia  well  popula- 
ted district  townships,  two  miles  square  is  considered  a  desirable 
area  for  each  sub-district 115 

The  division  of  a  large  and  populous  district  township,  into  but  four  sub- 
districts,  is  not  such  a  division,  as  justice  and  the  interests  of  the 
people  require 119 

When  it  becomss  necessary  to  reduce  a  sub-district  in  extent,  the  town- 
ship should  be  re-districted,  unless  sub-districts  can  be  formed  by 
division,  of  compact  shape,  and  sufficiently  large  to  sustain  good 
schools 123 

Four  sections  of  land  is  considered  the  minimum  area  that  a  sub-district 
should  contain 126 

Erection  of,  from  adjoining  district  townships.  The  county  superintendent 
will  be  sustained  on  appeal  in  erecting  territory  into  a  sub-district  in 
an  adjoining  district  township,  under  the  provisions  of  section  25 
school  laws,  if  such  territory  is  attached  to  the  adjoining  district 
township  by  reason  of  natural  obstacles 131 

When  a  sub-district  composed  of  four  sections  of  land  has  built  its  own 
school-house,  it  should  not  be  consolidated  with  another  as  a  tempo- 
rary expedient  to  avoid  the  expense  of  maintaining  a  school 135 

The  formation  of  small  or   irregularly  shaped  sub-districts  should   be 

avoided 135 

SUB-DISTRICT  BOUNDARIES— 

A  sub  district  which,  prior  to  the  passage  of  the  act  of  12th  March, 
1858,  wras  composed  of  parts  of  two  or  more  civil  townships,  can- 
not be  dissolved  by  the  action  of  but  one  of  the  boards  of  directors 
interested • 10 

Change  of.  Sub-district  boundaries  may  be  changed,  only  at  the  regular 
meeting  of  the  board  of  directors  in  September,  or  at  a  special 
meeting  called  thereafter  for  that  purpose,  before  the  following  sub- 
district  election 14 

In  changing  sub-district  boundaries,  both  the  present  and  future  wel- 
fare of  the  district  should  be  considered 20 


144 


INDEX 


SUB-DISTRTC  T  BOUNDARIES— CONTINUED— 

The  county  superintendent  may,  on  appeal,  re  district.  A  refusal  by 
board  to  act  upon  a  petition  to  re-district,  is  an  act  from  which  an 
appeal  will  lie 40 

The  acts  of  a  board  of  directors  changing  sub-district  boundaries  and 
locating  school-houses  are  so  far  discretionary  that  they  should  be 
affirmed  on  appeal,  unless  it  is  shown  that  there  has  been  an  abuse 
of  discretion 69 

The  action  of  the  board  of  directors  upon  the  question  of  forming  new 
sub-districts  will  be  sustained,  on  appeal,  unless  it  is  made  to  appear 
that  their  action  was  illegal,  or  that  manifest  injustice  will  result 
therefrom.  The  refusal  of  a  board  of  directors  to  form  a  new  sub- 
district  from  parts  of  four  sub-districts  which  comprise  four  sections 
of  land  each,  arranged  in  compact  form,  each  sub-district  having  a 
school-house  centrally  located,  is  not  such  an  act  of  injustice  or  such 
an  abuse  of  discretion  as  to  justify  the  interference  of  either  the 
county  superintendent  or  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction. .  85 

The  change  of  sub-district  boundaries  by  the  board  of  directors  is  a 
discretionary  act 100 

It  requires  an  affirmative  vote  of  a  majority  of  all  tlie  members  of  the 
board  to  effect  a  change  in  sub-district  boundaries 114 

TEACHERS- 

Right  of  to  inflict  punishment  upon  their  pupils.  A  school-master  who 
stands  in  laco  parentis  may,  in  proper  cases,  inflict  moderate  and 
reasonable  chastisement.  The  law  confides  to  teachers  a  discretion- 
ary power  in  the  infliction  of  punishment  upon  their  pupils,  and 
will  not  hold  them  responsible  criminally,  unless  the  punishment  be 
such  as  to  occasion  permanent  injury  to  the  child,  or  be  inflicted 
merely  to  gratify  their  own  evil  passions 22 

TRANSCRIPT- 

The  transcript  which  the  law  requires  the  secretary  to  transmit  to  the 
county  superintendent,  in  case  of  appeal,  must  be  full  and  com- 
plete   74 


YC  53872 


289854 


/S72, 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


